Estimation of the risk of tubal factor infertility associated with genital chlamydial infection in women: a statistical modelling study.

OBJECTIVES: Using a statistical modelling approach, our study aim is to determine reliable age-related estimates of the risk of all-cause tubal factor infertility (TFI) following past or current chlamydial infection in women in Scotland. METHOD: Using data from several sources, a Markov-Chain Monte Carlo model was used to estimate the age-related risk of TFI given genital chlamydia infection at any time. The analysis is based on the probability of a woman ever having chlamydial infection, ever having TFI and ever having a previous chlamydial infection given a diagnosis of TFI. The model was programmed and evaluated using WinBugs14. RESULTS: By the age 44 years, the overall risk of a woman having at least a single chlamydial infection is estimated at 42.9% (95% credible interval 30.0, 59.0%). The risk of a woman having TFI increased from 0.5% in those aged 16-19 years to 0.8% in those aged 40-44. The overall estimated probability of TFI, based on lifetime infertility, given a past or current chlamydial infection, is relatively consistent across all five age groups from 16-44 years, being 0.9% among those aged 25-29 and 1.4% in those aged 35-39; The estimates were found to be sensitive to the definition of infertility, with the estimate increasing from 1.3% in the youngest age group to 2.8% and 4.5% for 24-month primary infertility and primary or secondary infertility, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: At the population level, the likelihood of all-cause TFI in those with past or current chlamydial infection is low. These findings have relevance both at the policy level, in the development of control programmes, and also at an individual level, particularly for clinicians supporting women undergoing testing or with a positive diagnosis.

Overcoming barriers to engaging socio-economically disadvantaged populations in CHD primary prevention: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Preventative medicine has become increasingly important in efforts to reduce the burden of chronic disease in industrialised countries. However, interventions that fail to recruit socio-economically representative samples may widen existing health inequalities. This paper explores the barriers and facilitators to engaging a socio-economically disadvantaged (SED) population in primary prevention for coronary heart disease (CHD). METHODS: The primary prevention element of Have a Heart Paisley (HaHP) offered risk screening to all eligible individuals. The programme employed two approaches to engaging with the community: a) a social marketing campaign and b) a community development project adopting primarily face-to-face canvassing. Individuals living in areas of SED were under-recruited via the social marketing approach, but successfully recruited via face-to-face canvassing. This paper reports on focus group discussions with participants, exploring their perceptions about and experiences of both approaches. RESULTS: Various reasons were identified for low uptake of risk screening amongst individuals living in areas of high SED in response to the social marketing campaign and a number of ways in which the face-to-face canvassing approach overcame these barriers were identified. These have been categorised into four main themes: (1) processes of engagement; (2) issues of understanding; (3) design of the screening service and (4) the priority accorded to screening. The most immediate barriers to recruitment were the invitation letter, which often failed to reach its target, and the general distrust of postal correspondence. In contrast, participants were positive about the face-to-face canvassing approach. Participants expressed a lack of knowledge and understanding about CHD and their risk of developing it and felt there was a lack of clarity in the information provided in the mailing in terms of the process and value of screening. In contrast, direct face-to-face contact meant that outreach workers could explain what to expect. Participants felt that the procedure for uptake of screening was demanding and inflexible, but that the drop-in sessions employed by the community development project had a major impact on recruitment and retention. CONCLUSION: Socio-economically disadvantaged individuals can be hard-to-reach; engagement requires strategies tailored to the needs of the target population rather than a population-wide approach.