Economic evaluation alongside a clinical trial of near-to-patient testing for sexually transmitted infections.

BACKGROUND: Current clinical care for common bacterial STIs (Chlamydia trachomatis (CT), Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) and Mycoplasma genitalium (MG)) involves empiric antimicrobial therapy when clients are symptomatic, or if asymptomatic, waiting for laboratory testing and recall if indicated. Near-to-patient testing (NPT) can improve pathogen-specific prescribing and reduce unnecessary or inappropriate antibiotic use in treating sexually transmitted infections (STI) by providing same-day delivery of results and treatment. METHODS: We compared the economic cost of NPT to current clinic practice for managing clients with suspected proctitis, non-gonococcal urethritis (NGU), or as an STI contact, from a health provider's perspective. With a microsimulation of 1000 clients, we calculated the cost per client tested and per STI- and pathogen- detected for each testing strategy. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the main outcomes. Costs are reported as Australian dollars (2023). RESULTS: In the standard care arm, cost per client tested for proctitis, NGU in men who have sex with men (MSM) and heterosexual men were the highest at $247.96 (95% Prediction Interval (PI): 246.77-249.15), $204.23 (95% PI: 202.70-205.75) and $195.01 (95% PI: 193.81-196.21) respectively. Comparatively, in the NPT arm, it costs $162.36 (95% PI: 161.43-163.28), $158.39 (95% PI: 157.62-159.15) and $149.17 (95% PI: 148.62-149.73), respectively. Using NPT resulted in cost savings of 34.52%, 22.45% and 23.51%, respectively. Among all the testing strategies, substantial difference in cost per client tested between the standard care arm and the NPT arm was observed for contacts of CT or NG, varying from 27.37% to 35.28%. CONCLUSION: We found that NPT is cost-saving compared with standard clinical care for individuals with STI symptoms and sexual contacts of CT, NG, and MG.

Investigating point-of-care diagnostics for sexually transmitted infections and antimicrobial resistance in antenatal care in Zimbabwe (IPSAZ): protocol for a mixed-methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) can cause serious morbidity, including pelvic inflammatory disease, and adverse pregnancy outcomes. In low/middle-income countries, limited laboratory infrastructure has resulted in a syndrome-based approach being used for management of STIs, which has poor sensitivity and specificity, leading to considerable underdiagnosis and overtreatment. The WHO has called for development and evaluation of strategies to inform replacement of syndromic management by diagnostic testing.The aim of this project is to evaluate a strategy of point-of-care testing for six STIs in antenatal care (ANC) in Zimbabwe. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A prospective interventional study will be conducted in ANC clinics in Harare province, Zimbabwe. One thousand pregnant women will be recruited when registering for routine ANC. Alongside routine HIV and syphilis testing, participants will be offered an integrated screening package including testing for Chlamydia trachomatis (CT), Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG), Trichomonas vaginalis (TV) and hepatitis B. All individuals with STIs will receive treatment, partner notification services, risk reduction counselling and referral if needed according to national guidelines. Gonorrhoea samples will be cultured and tested for antimicrobial resistance as per WHO enhanced gonococcal antimicrobial surveillance programme guidelines.The primary outcome measure is the composite prevalence of CT, NG, TV, syphilis and hepatitis B. A mixed-methods process evaluation and economic evaluation will be conducted to understand the acceptability, feasibility and cost-effectiveness of integrated STI testing, compared with standard of care (syndromic management). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the Medical Research Council of Zimbabwe, the Biomedical Research and Training Institute Institutional Review Board, and the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Research Ethics Committee. Results will be submitted to open-access peer-reviewed journals, presented at academic meetings and shared with participating communities and with national and international policymaking bodies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05541081.

Update on the Epidemiology, Screening, and Management of Chlamydia trachomatis Infection.

Chlamydia trachomatis infection ("chlamydia") is the most commonly diagnosed bacterial sexually transmitted infection globally, occurring in the genitals (urethra or vagina/cervix), rectum, or pharynx. If left untreated in women, genital chlamydia can ascend into the upper genital tract causing pelvic inflammatory disease, increasing their risk for ectopic pregnancy, infertility, and chronic pelvic pain. In men, chlamydia can cause epididymitis and proctitis. However, chlamydia is asymptomatic in over 80% of cases. This article provides an update on the epidemiology, natural history, and clinical manifestations of chlamydia in adults and discusses the current approaches to its management and control policy.

Cost-effectiveness of Check It: A Novel Community-Based Chlamydia Screening and Expedited Treatment Program for Young Black Men.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of the Check It program, a novel community-based chlamydia screening and expedited partner treatment program for young Black men conducted in New Orleans since 2017. METHODS: We implemented a probabilistic cost-effectiveness model using a synthetic cohort of 16 181 men and 13 419 women intended to simulate the size of the Black, sexually active population in New Orleans ages 15-24 years. RESULTS: The Check It program cost $196 838 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $117 320-$287 555) to implement, saved 10.2 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs; 95% CI: 7.7-12.7 QALYs), and saved $140 950 (95% CI: -$197 018 to -$105 620) in medical costs per year. The program cost $5468 (95% CI: cost saving, $16 717) per QALY gained. All iterations of the probabilistic model returned cost-effectiveness ratios less than $50 000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: The Check It program (a bundled seek, test, and treat chlamydia prevention program for young Black men) is cost-effective under base case assumptions. Communities where Chlamydia trachomatis rates have not declined could consider implementing a similar program.

Estimating the Direct Medical Costs and Productivity Loss of Outpatient Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Treatment.

ABSTRACT: We used 2016-2017 administrative claims data to calculate the direct medical cost and productivity loss per diagnosed case of chlamydia and gonorrhea treatment. In 2018 US dollars, the direct cost per diagnosed case was $151 for chlamydia (n = 9180) and $85 for gonorrhea (n = 3048); productivity loss was $206 (n = 31) and $246 (n = 7), respectively, among those missing work seeking care.

Screening and Treatment of Sexually Transmitted Infections Among Medicaid Populations-A 2-State Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis are common, treatable sexually transmitted infections (STIs) that are highly prevalent in the general US population. Costs associated with diagnosing and treating these conditions for individual states' Medicaid participants are unknown. The purpose of this study was to estimate the cost of screening and treatment for 3 common STIs for state Medicaid program budgets in Maryland and South Carolina. METHODS: A retrospective, cross-sectional study was conducted using Medicaid administrative claims data over a 2-year period. Claims were included based on the presence of one of the 3 study conditions in either diagnosis or procedure codes. Descriptive analyses were used to characterize the participant population and expenditures for services provided. RESULTS: Total Medicaid expenditures for STI care in state fiscal years 2016 and 2017 averaged $43.5 million and $22.3 million for each year in Maryland and South Carolina, respectively. Maryland had a greater proportion of costs associated with outpatient hospital and laboratory settings. Costs for care provided in the emergency department were highest in South Carolina. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis and treatment of commonly reported STIs may have a considerable financial impact on individual state Medicaid programs. Public health activities directed at STI prevention are important tools for reducing these costs to states.

Accelerated partner therapy (APT) partner notification for people with Chlamydia trachomatis: protocol for the Limiting Undetected Sexually Transmitted infections to RedUce Morbidity (LUSTRUM) APT cross-over cluster randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Partner notification (PN) is a process aiming to identify, test and treat the sex partners of people (index patients) with sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Accelerated partner therapy (APT) is a PN method whereby healthcare professionals assess sex partners, by telephone consultation, before giving the index patient antibiotics and STI self-sampling kits to deliver to their sex partner(s). The Limiting Undetected Sexually Transmitted infections to RedUce Morbidity programme aims to determine the effectiveness of APT in heterosexual women and men with chlamydia and determine whether APT could affect Chlamydia trachomatis transmission at population level. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol describes a cross-over cluster randomised controlled trial of APT, offered as an additional PN method, compared with standard PN. The trial is accompanied by an economic evaluation, transmission dynamic modelling and a qualitative process evaluation involving patients, partners and healthcare professionals. Clusters are 17 sexual health clinics in areas of England and Scotland with contrasting patient demographics. We will recruit 5440 heterosexual women and men with chlamydia, aged ≥16 years.The primary outcome is the proportion of index patients testing positive for C. trachomatis 12-16 weeks after the PN consultation. Secondary outcomes include: proportion of sex partners treated; cost effectiveness; model-predicted chlamydia prevalence; experiences of APT.The primary outcome analysis will be by intention-to-treat, fitting random effects logistic regression models that account for clustering of index patients within clinics and trial periods. The transmission dynamic model will be used to predict change in chlamydia prevalence following APT. The economic evaluation will use mathematical modelling outputs, taking a health service perspective. Qualitative data will be analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis and framework analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol received ethical approval from London-Chelsea Research Ethics Committee (18/LO/0773). Findings will be published with open access licences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN15996256.

Breakdown in the expedited partner therapy treatment cascade: from reproductive healthcare provider to the pharmacist.

BACKGROUND: The rising incidence rates of sexually transmitted infections in the United States highlight the need for concurrent treatment of patients and their sexual partners. Expedited partner therapy allows healthcare providers to offer antibiotic prescriptions or medications to an index patient for distribution to their sexual partner(s) without evaluating the partner. We hypothesized that there was a gap between expedited partner therapy policy at the state level and its downstream implementation by community pharmacists. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of our study were to evaluate pharmacists' expedited partner therapy knowledge and practices in 41 expedited partner therapy-permissible US states, to determine whether there were differences in practice based on the length of time expedited partner therapy was permissible in the state and chlamydia incidence rates, and to measure the cost of expedited partner therapy treatment. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized cohort of pharmacists (n=335) was invited to complete a telephone interview from November 2017 through January 2018. Descriptive statistics were calculated and stratified by early, mid, and late expedited partner therapy-adopter status based on the year of the state's expedited partner therapy enactment and the state's chlamydia incidence rate. Fisher's exact test and 1-way analyses of variance were used to compare measures across strata. RESULTS: We had 143 pharmacists (42.7%) agree to complete the survey. Among our respondents, 40.6% (n=58/143) indicated that they were aware of expedited partner therapy; 14.7% (n=21/143) reported that they had ever received an expedited partner therapy prescription, and 97% (n=139/143) reported that they would dispense an expedited partner therapy prescription if they received 1 in the future. These findings were stable across the 6 strata defined by early, mid, or late expedited partner therapy-adopter and high or low incidence rates of chlamydia status. Mean cost of azithromycin 1000 mg and cefixime 400 mg for treatment of chlamydia and gonorrhea was $22.17 (95% confidence interval, 20.29-24.05) and $30.46 (95% confidence interval, 28.65-32.26), respectively. CONCLUSION: Fewer than one-half of the pharmacists were aware of expedited partner therapy. A small minority of pharmacists reported ever having received an expedited partner therapy prescription, regardless of the length of time expedited partner therapy had been legal in their states and the incidence of chlamydia. However, almost all pharmacists reported that they would dispense an expedited partner therapy prescription if they received 1. Additionally, costs were high for expedited partner therapy for self-pay patients. These data suggest that there are opportunities to increase expedited partner therapy utilization by healthcare providers, patients, and pharmacists.

Healthcare providers and community perspectives on expedited partner therapy (EPT) for use with gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men.

OBJECTIVES: Expedited partner therapy (EPT) is an effective strategy to reduce rates of chlamydia and gonorrhoea infection and ensure sexual partners are treated. Currently, EPT is provided to heterosexual patients; however, EPT is not routinely recommended for use with gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) because of concerns about HIV coinfection. The objective of the qualitative study was to understand provider and community views on the use of EPT with GBMSM. METHODS: Using convenience sampling methods, we recruited a sample of 18 healthcare providers and 21 GBMSM to participate in in-depth, semistructured interviews. Interviews were conducted over the phone and included questions about knowledge, experiences and potential barriers and facilitators to the use of EPT with GBMSM. RESULTS: Most providers wanted to provide EPT to GBMSM and believed that the potential barriers and concerns to EPT use were not unique to a patient's sexual orientation. Several providers noted that they were currently providing EPT to GBMSM as part of HIV prevention services. Community members were generally unaware of EPT as a service and most indicated that they would only use EPT if they were in a committed relationship. Barriers included partner allergies and resistance, pharmacy protocols, structural concerns (eg, insurance coverage, pharmacists onsite and transportation) and potential disclosure issues. Facilitators included cultural humility and telemedicine with patients' partners to overcome these barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Acceptability of EPT use for both chlamydia and gonorrhoea was high among providers and community members. Barriers to EPT use, including concerns about patients' partners' allergies and resistance, disclosure concerns and linkage to HIV prevention services can be overcome through cultural humility trainings and telemedicine. Changing EPT recommendations at the national level to be inclusive of GBMSM is critical to curtail the rising STI and HIV epidemic.

ADOPTing a new method of partner management for genital chlamydia in New South Wales: findings from a pilot implementation program of patient-delivered partner therapy.

Background Patient-delivered partner therapy (PDPT) for chlamydia is an effective and safe additional partner management strategy. Some Australian regulatory changes have been made to support PDPT, but implementation guidance is lacking. This paper describes a pilot implementation program of PDPT in New South Wales (NSW), the Australian Development and Operationalisation of Partner Therapy (ADOPT). METHODS: ADOPT involved: (1) clarification of the NSW PDPT legal and policy framework; (2) development and implementation of PDPT service models, resources and data collection tools for select publicly funded sexual health services (PFSHS) and Family Planning (FP) NSW clinics; and (3) evaluation of PDPT uptake. RESULTS: PDPT can be undertaken in NSW if accompanied by adequate provider, patient and partner information. Regulatory amendments enabled medication prescribing. The pilot implementation took place in four PFSHS and five FPNSW clinics from January to December 2016. In PFSHS, 30% of eligible patients were offered PDPT and 89% accepted the offer. In FPNSW clinics, 42% of eligible patients were offered PDPT and 63% accepted the offer. Most partners for whom PDPT was accepted were regular partners. CONCLUSIONS: A close collaboration of researchers, policy makers and clinicians allowed successful implementation of a PDPT model for chlamydia in heterosexual patients at select PFSHS and FPNSW clinics, providing guidance on its use as standard of care. However, for the full public health benefits of PDPT to be realised, it must be implemented in general practice, where most chlamydia is diagnosed. Further work is recommended to explore feasibility, develop guidelines and promote the integration of PDPT into general practice.

Improving Women's Health and Combatting Sexually Transmitted Infections Through Expedited Partner Therapy.

Sexually transmitted infections (STI), including Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae, have reached record high rates in the United States. Sexually transmitted infections disproportionately affect reproductive-aged females aged 15-44 years, who account for 65% and 42% of the total reported C trachomatis and N gonorrhoeae cases, respectively. Undiagnosed STIs can result in serious health complications that put women at an increased risk for pelvic inflammatory disease, ectopic pregnancy, and tubal factor infertility. Many of these women are seen by physicians (eg, obstetrician-gynecologists, family medicine doctors, pediatricians) or other clinicians (eg, nurse practitioners, midwives, physician assistants) who care for women. These clinicians have the opportunity to help curb the continued increase in STI incidence rates with the implementation and use of expedited partner therapy. Expedited partner therapy is a proven effective health care practice that allows clinicians to give patients medications or prescriptions to distribute to their partners. Despite expedited partner therapy's proven effectiveness, there are barriers to its implementation that must be understood to enhance STI treatment and prevention efforts. In this commentary, we discuss these barriers, and appeal to women's health clinicians to implement or increase use of expedited partner therapy for the treatment of women with STIs and their sexual partners.

Modelling-based evaluation of the costs, benefits and cost-effectiveness of multipathogen point-of-care tests for sexually transmitted infections in symptomatic genitourinary medicine clinic attendees.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the costs, benefits and cost-effectiveness of three multipathogen point-of-care (POC) testing strategies for detecting common sexually transmitted infections (STIs) compared with standard laboratory testing. DESIGN: Modelling study. SETTING: Genitourinary medicine (GUM) services in England. POPULATION: A hypothetical cohort of 965 988 people, representing the annual number attending GUM services symptomatic of lower genitourinary tract infection. INTERVENTIONS: The decision tree model considered costs and reimbursement to GUM services associated with diagnosing and managing STIs. Three strategies using hypothetical point-of-care tests (POCTs) were compared with standard care (SC) using laboratory-based testing. The strategies were: A) dual POCT for Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG); B) triplex POCT for CT-NG and Mycoplasma genitalium (MG); C) quadruplex POCT for CT-NG-MG and Trichomonas vaginalis (TV). Data came from published literature and unpublished estimates. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were total costs and benefits (quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) for each strategy (2016 GB, £) and associated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) between each of the POC strategies and SC. Secondary outcomes were inappropriate treatment of STIs, onward STI transmission, pelvic inflammatory disease in women, time to cure and total attendances. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, POC strategy C, a quadruplex POCT, was the most cost-effective relative to the other strategies, with an ICER of £36 585 per QALY gained compared with SC when using microcosting, and cost-savings of £26 451 382 when using tariff costing. POC strategy C also generated the most benefits, with 240 467 fewer clinic attendances, 808 fewer onward STI transmissions and 235 135 averted inappropriate treatments compared with SC. CONCLUSIONS: Many benefits can be achieved by using multipathogen POCTs to improve STI diagnosis and management. Further evidence is needed on the underlying prevalence of STIs and SC delivery in the UK to reduce uncertainty in economic analyses.

Does Nonmetropolitan Residence Impact Timely Chlamydia Treatment in Massachusetts?

A mean of 4.5 days until treatment was documented in a subset of reported laboratory-confirmed Massachusetts chlamydia cases selected for active case report form completion. Treatment delay was associated with longer test result turnaround time, and absence of symptoms or contact to sexually transmitted disease. Nonmetropolitan versus metropolitan residence did not appear to impact treatment time.

Partner notification and partner treatment for chlamydia: attitude and practice of general practitioners in the Netherlands; a landscape analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chlamydia prevalence remains high despite scaling-up control efforts. Transmission is not effectively interrupted without partner notification (PN) and (timely) partner treatment (PT). In the Netherlands, the follow-up of partners is not standardized and may depend on GPs' time and priorities. We investigated current practice and attitude of GPs towards PN and PT to determine the potential for Patient-Initiated Partner Treatment, which is legally not supported yet. METHODS: Multiple data-sources were combined for a landscape analysis. Quantitative data on (potential) PT were obtained from prescriptions in the national pharmacy register (2004-2014) and electronic patient data from NIVEL-Primary Care Database (PCD) and from STI consultations in a subgroup of sentinel practices therein. Furthermore, we collected information on current practice via two short questionnaires at a national GP conference and obtained insight into GPs' attitudes towards PN/PT in a vignette study among GPs partaking in NIVEL-PCD. RESULTS: Prescription data showed Azithromycin double dosages in 1-2% of cases in the pharmacy register (37.000 per year); probable chlamydia-specific repeated prescriptions or double dosages of other antibiotics in NIVEL-PCD (115/1078) could not be interpreted as PT for chlamydia with certainty. STI consultation data revealed direct PT in 6/100 cases, via partner prescription or double doses. In the questionnaires the large majority of GPs (>95% of 1411) reported to discuss PN of current and ex-partner(s) with chlamydia patients. Direct PT was indicated as most common method by 4% of 271 GPs overall and by 12% for partners registered in the same practice. Usually, GPs leave further steps to the patients (83%), advising patients to tell partners to get tested (56%) or treated (28%). In the vignette study, 16-20% of 268 GPs indicated willingness to provide direct PT, depending on patient/partner profile, more (24-45%) if patients would have the chance to notify their partner first. CONCLUSION: GPs in the Netherlands already treat some partners of chlamydia cases directly, especially partners registered in the same practice. Follow-up of partner notification and treatment in general practice needs more attention. GPs may be open to implement PIPT more often, provided there are clear guidelines to arrange this legally and practically.

Assessment of florfenicol as a possible treatment for chlamydiosis in koalas (Phascolarctos cinereus).

OBJECTIVE: Because of limited availability of chloramphenicol to veterinary suppliers, a preliminary study was performed to predict whether an analogue, florfenicol, is an efficacious treatment for chlamydiosis in koalas. METHODS: Florfenicol was administered to koalas with naturally occurring chlamydiosis at 20 mg/kg SC (n = 3) and at 5 mg/kg (n = 3) and 10 mg/kg (n = 3) IV. The estimated areas under the plasma concentration versus time curves (AUC) were compared with the minimum inhibitory concentration to inhibit Chlamydia pecorum. Clinical data were also examined from field trials conducted on koalas (n = 19) with naturally occurring chlamydiosis and treated with florfenicol at a range of dosages (5-20 mg/kg SC and 6-15 mg/kg IV). Florfenicol binding to proteins in plasma was also determined. RESULTS: Florfenicol was not detectable in plasma 24 h post-administration at 20 mg/kg SC. The estimated AUC0-24 h following administration at 10 mg/kg IV suggests florfenicol might be effective against Chlamydia spp. via this route. Florfenicol binding to plasma proteins was 13.0% (± 0.30 SEM). After treatment with florfenicol in field trials, 5 of 19 koalas (26%) were released without further treatment, 4 with no long-term follow-up; 6 (32%) required additional treatment with chloramphenicol to resolve chlamydiosis; 7 (36%) failed to clinically improve, of which 3 had clinical signs and/or necropsy findings suggestive of antibiotic-related gastrointestinal dysbiosis; another koala died within minutes of florfenicol administered IV at 7 mg/kg. CONCLUSION: When administered at dosages tolerable in the field, florfenicol is a problematic treatment for chlamydiosis based on equivocal outcomes and plasma concentrations below those that inhibit the pathogen.

A prospective assessment of pelvic infection risk following same-day sexually transmitted infection testing and levonorgestrel intrauterine system placement.

BACKGROUND: Misperceptions persist that intrauterine device placement is related to pelvic infections and Chlamydia and gonorrhea testing results are needed prior to placement. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the relationship of Chlamydia and gonorrhea screening to pelvic infection for up to 2 years following placement of the levonorgestrel 52-mg intrauterine system. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 1751 nulliparous and multiparous females 16 to 45 years old enrolled in a multicenter trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new levonorgestrel intrauterine system for up to 7 years. Participants had Chlamydia screening at study entry and yearly if they were age ≤25 years. Women also had baseline gonorrhea screening if testing had not been performed since starting their current sexual relationship. Those who changed sexual partners during the trial had repeated Chlamydia and gonorrhea testing. Intrauterine system insertion could occur on the same day as screening. Participants did not receive prophylactic antibiotics for intrauterine system placement. Investigators performed pelvic examinations after 12 and 24 months and when clinically indicated during visits at 3, 6, and 18 months after placement and unscheduled visits. Pelvic infection included any clinical diagnosis of pelvic inflammatory disease or endometritis. RESULTS: Most participants (n = 1364, 79.6%) did not have sexually transmitted infection test results available prior to intrauterine system placement. In all, 29 (1.7%) participants had positive baseline testing for a sexually transmitted infection (Chlamydia, n = 25; gonorrhea, n = 3; both, n = 1); 6 of these participants had known results (all with Chlamydia infection) prior to intrauterine system placement and received treatment before enrollment. The 23 participants whose results were not known at the time of intrauterine system placement received treatment without intrauterine system removal and none developed pelvic infection. The incidence of positive Chlamydia testing was similar among those with and without known test results at the time of intrauterine system placement (1.9% vs 1.5%, respectively, P = .6). Nine (0.5%) participants had a diagnosis of pelvic infection over 2 years after placement, all of whom had negative Chlamydia screening on the day of or within 1 month after intrauterine system placement. Infections were diagnosed in 3 participants within 7 days, 1 at 39 days, and 5 at ≥6 months. Seven participants received outpatient antibiotic treatment and 2 (diagnoses between 6-12 months after placement) received inpatient treatment. Two (0.1%) participants had intrauterine system removal related to infection (at 6 days and at 7 months after placement), both of whom only required outpatient treatment. CONCLUSION: Conducting Chlamydia and gonorrhea testing on the same day as intrauterine system placement is associated with a low risk of pelvic infection (0.2%). Over the first 2 years of intrauterine system use, infections are infrequent and not temporally related to intrauterine system placement. Pelvic infection can be successfully treated in most women with outpatient antibiotics and typically does not require intrauterine system removal. Women without clinical evidence of active infection can have intrauterine system placement and sexually transmitted infection screening, if indicated, on the same day.

What is needed to guide testing for anorectal and pharyngeal Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in women and men? Evidence and opinion.

BACKGROUND: Anorectal and pharyngeal infections with Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrheae (NG) are commonly observed in men who have sex with men (MSM). There is increasing evidence that such infections at extra-genital sites are also common in women. In both sexes, these infections are largely overlooked as they are not routinely tested for in regular care. Testing based on sexual behavior or symptoms would only detect half of these extra-genital infections. This paper elucidates the differences and similarities between women and MSM, regarding the epidemiology of extra-genital CT and NG. It discusses the clinical and public health impact of untested extra-genital infections, how this may impact management strategies, and thereby identifies key research areas. DISCUSSION: Extra-genital CT is as common in women as it is in MSM; NG in women is as common at their extra-genital sites as it is at their genital sites. The substantial numbers of extra-genital CT and NG being missed in women and MSM indicate a need to test and treat more patients and perhaps different choices in treatment and partner management strategies. Doing so will likely contribute to reduced morbidity and transmission in both sexes. However, in our opinion, it is clear that there are several knowledge gaps in understanding the clinical and public health impact of extra-genital CT and NG. Key research areas that need to be addressed concern associated morbidity (anorectal and reproductive morbidity due to extra-genital infections), 'the best' management strategies, including testing and treatment for extra-genital CT, extra-genital treatment resistance, transmission probabilities between partners and between anatomic sites in a woman, and impact on transmission of other infections. Data are also lacking on cost-effectiveness of pharyngeal testing, and of NG testing and anorectal CT testing in women. Gaps in the management of extra-genital CT and NG may also apply for other STIs, such Mycoplasma genitalium. Current management strategies, including testing, to address extra-genital CT and NG in both sexes are suboptimal. Comparative data on several identified key themes in women and MSM are lacking and urgently needed to guide better management of extra-genital infections.

Variation in Practice of Expedited Partner Therapy for Adolescents by State Policy Environment.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess provider practice of expedited partner therapy (EPT) for adolescents with chlamydial infection across varying state policy environments and compare provider practice in a parallel treatment scenario for a nonsexually transmitted disease. METHODS: Anonymous survey of randomly selected providers in one of three state EPT policy environments: EPT is (A) explicitly legal; (B) permissible, but not directly referenced in law; or (C) potentially allowable. RESULTS: Of 195 respondents, only 20% reported ever practicing EPT. Group A providers were more likely to have used EPT than Groups B and C. Commonly cited barriers included missed opportunity to counsel partners and ensuring medication delivery. In parallel hypothetical scenarios, providers were more likely to offer prophylactic antibiotics to a patient's mother for pertussis exposure without a face-to-face visit than the sexual partner of an adolescent with chlamydia. CONCLUSIONS: Further investigation is needed to better understand provider and policy factors that may facilitate EPT provision to adolescents.