Effectiveness of Chlamydia trachomatis expedited partner therapy in pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Expedited partner therapy for Chlamydia trachomatis has had mixed efficacy in different populations, but limited data exist on the efficacy of the therapy in a pregnant population. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of establishing a prenatal expedited partner therapy program in eradicating chlamydia before delivery and to examine the maternal and neonatal outcomes between women who received expedited partner therapy for chlamydia and women who received standard partner referral testing and treatment during pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: An expedited partner therapy program was implemented on August 21, 2019, at a public hospital in a county with high chlamydia prevalence. Pregnant women were provided with single-dose packets of azithromycin to treat partners following a diagnosis of chlamydia infection. We prospectively observed pregnant women treated in the expedited partner therapy program who delivered at our institution in the same year and compared the outcomes with a historic cohort from the previous year that had traditional partner referral testing and treatment. We excluded women with concurrent gonorrhea, HIV, syphilis, or current intimate partner violence. The primary outcome was chlamydia reinfection or no-cure rates at repeat testing in 4 to 6 weeks following treatment or at the 36-week prenatal care screening. Secondary outcomes included obstetrical, maternal, and neonatal outcomes, including premature rupture of membranes, chorioamnionitis, endometritis, neonatal intensive care unit admission, neonatal sepsis, pneumonia, and conjunctivitis. RESULTS: The rate of chlamydia infection was 3.6% over a 2-year period in our delivered population. In the year following the implementation of the expedited partner therapy, compared with 419 women (mean±standard deviation, 23.4±5.5 years) who were diagnosed with chlamydia infection in the previous year, 471 women (mean±standard deviation age, 23.8±5.3 years) who delivered at our institution were diagnosed with chlamydia infection. There was no difference in race, parity, prenatal care attendance, or concomitant sexually transmitted infections. Compared with the pre-expedited partner therapy group, the rate of reinfection in the post-expedited partner therapy group was not statistically different (60/471 [13%] vs 61/419 [15%]; odds ratio, 0.86 [95% confidence interval 0.58-1.26]). In a per-protocol analysis, 72 women (17%) in the pre-expedited partner therapy group and 389 women (83%) in post-expedited partner therapy group received expedited partner therapy; reinfection was not statistically different between groups (P=.47). There was no difference in secondary outcomes, although a trend toward improved rates of endometritis was noted in the post-expedited partner therapy group (odds ratio, 0.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.02-1.02). CONCLUSION: The implementation of a prenatal expedited partner therapy program did not affect the rate of chlamydia reinfection before delivery. Treatment of chlamydia in an inner-city population has multiple factors that lead to successful treatment. Future efforts to reduce sexually transmitted infection and chlamydia reinfection rates in an at-risk population should include exploring patient education and safe sex practices beyond expedited partner therapy alone during pregnancy.

It's Time to Expand Chlamydia Treatment for Gay and Bisexual Men.

Expedited partner therapy involves prescribing sexually transmitted infection (STI) treatment for a patient's partner(s) without seeing the partner. It is approved for heterosexual partners of patients with chlamydia in most states. However, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends against expedited partner therapy in men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM), citing limited data in this population and concerns that expedited partner therapy could discourage comprehensive STI testing, thereby driving increased HIV transmission. In this piece, we describe the case of a 33-year-old gay man on HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) whose cycle of chlamydia reinfection might have been prevented by expedited partner therapy. His case highlights how new HIV prevention strategies-including PrEP and Treatment as Prevention-challenge the assumption that all MSM with chlamydia are at risk for HIV. Until more data on expedited partner therapy in MSM are available, clinicians should incorporate characteristics of patients' sexual networks in weighing the risks and benefits of expedited partner therapy.

High willingness to use novel HIV and bacterial sexually transmitted infection partner notification, testing, and treatment strategies among gay and bisexual men.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine willingness of gay and bisexual men (GBM) to give HIV self-testing (HIVST) kits with patient-delivered partner therapy (PDPT) and engage in geosocial sexual networking (GSN) app-based partner notification. METHODS: A nationwide sample of GBM who self-tested HIV negative (n=786) were asked about their willingness to give recent sex partners (main and casual) PDPT with an HIVST kit (PDPT+HIVST) after hypothetical bacterial STI (BSTI) diagnosis. Men were also asked about their willingness to notify sexual partners met on GSN apps using an anonymous app function after BSTI diagnosis. We examined associations of relationship status and condomless anal sex with casual partners, recent BSTI diagnosis and perceived risk of HIV on PDPT+HIVST and anonymous app-based partner notification willingness (dichotomised) using binary logistic regressions, adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, education and US region. From the partner's perspective after receiving an app-based referral, frequency measures were used to report intentions for obtaining subsequent HIV/BSTI counselling and testing, engaging in HIVST if provided a free voucher, and obtaining BSTI treatment from a pharmacy with prescription voucher. RESULTS: Most (90.1%) were willing to give PDPT+HIVST to recent sex partners after STI diagnosis, and nearly all (96.4%) were willing to notify sex partners met online using an anonymous function within GSN apps. Regardless of casual partner condomless anal sex engagement, partnered GBM had higher odds of reporting willingness to give PDPT+HIVST compared with single men who recently engaged in condomless anal sex with a casual partner. If anonymously notified via an app, 92.5% reported they would likely obtain counselling and testing, 92.8% would engage in HIVST if provided a free voucher, and 93.4% would obtain treatment from a pharmacy with prescription voucher. CONCLUSIONS: GBM generally found novel partner notification, testing, and treatment strategies acceptable, indicating the need for feasibility and cost-effectiveness evaluations.

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.

Pharmacy-level barriers to implementing expedited partner therapy in Baltimore, Maryland.

BACKGROUND: Addressing record high rates of Chlamydia trachomatis incidence in the United States requires the utilization of effective strategies, such as expedited partner therapy, to reduce reinfection and further transmission. Expedited partner therapy, which can be given as a prescription or medication, is a strategy to treat the sexual partners of index patients diagnosed with a sexually transmitted infection without prior medical evaluation of the partners. OBJECTIVE: There are multiple steps in the prescription-expedited partner therapy cascade, and we sought to identify pharmacy-level barriers to implementing prescription-expedited partner therapy for Chlamydia trachomatis treatment. STUDY DESIGN: We used spatial analysis and ArcGIS, a geographic information system, to map and assess geospatial access to pharmacies within Baltimore, MD, neighborhoods with the highest rates of Chlamydia trachomatis (1180.25-4255.31 per 100,000 persons). Expedited partner therapy knowledge and practices were collected via a telephone survey of pharmacists employed at retail pharmacies located in these same neighborhoods. Cost of antibiotic medication in US dollars was collected. RESULTS: Census tracts with the highest Chlamydia trachomatis incidence rates had lower median pharmacy density than other census tracts (26.9 per 100,000 vs 31.4 per 100,000, P < .001). We identified 25 pharmacy deserts. Areas defined as pharmacy deserts had larger proportions of black and Hispanic or Latino populations compared with non-Hispanic whites (93.1% vs 6.3%, P < .001) and trended toward higher median Chlamydia trachomatis incidence rates (1170.0 per 100,000 vs 1094.5 per 100,000, P = .110) than non-pharmacy desert areas. Of the 52 pharmacies identified, 96% (50 of 52) responded to our survey. Less than a fifth of pharmacists (18%, 9 of 50) were aware of expedited partner therapy for Chlamydia trachomatis. Most pharmacists (59%, 27 of 46) confirmed they would fill an expedited partner therapy prescription. The cost of a single dose of azithromycin (1 g) ranged from 5.00 to 39.99 US dollars (median, 30 US dollars). CONCLUSION: Limited geographic access to pharmacies, lack of pharmacist awareness of expedited partner therapy, and wide variation in expedited partner therapy medication cost are potential barriers to implementing prescription-expedited partner therapy. Although most Baltimore pharmacists were unaware of expedited partner therapy, they were generally receptive to learning about and filling expedited partner therapy prescriptions. This finding suggests the need for wide dissemination of educational material targeted to pharmacists. In areas with limited geographic access to pharmacies, expedited partner therapy strategies that do not depend on partners physically accessing a pharmacy merit consideration.

A pill for the partner via the chlamydia patient? Results from a mixed method study among sexual health care providers in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Chlamydia prevalence in the Netherlands remains high despite targeted efforts. Effective Partner Notification (PN) and Partner Treatment (PT) can interrupt transmission and prevent re-infections. Patient Initiated Partner Treatment (PIPT) may strengthen chlamydia control. This study explores the current practice of PN and PT, and benefits of, and barriers and facilitators for PIPT among professionals in sexual health care in the Netherlands. METHODS: A qualitative study was performed among GPs, GP-assistants (GPAs), physicians and nurses working at Sexual Health Clinics (SHC) and key-informants on ethnical diversity using topic lists in focus groups (N = 40) and semi-structured questionnaires in individual interviews (N = 9). Topics included current practices regarding PN and PT, attitude regarding PIPT, and perceived barriers and facilitators for PIPT. Interviews were taped, transcribed verbatim, and coded using ATLAS.ti. A quantitative online questionnaire on the same topics was sent to all physicians and nurses employed at Dutch SHC (complete response rate 26% (84/321)). RESULTS: The qualitative study showed that all professionals support the need for more attention to PN, and that they saw advantages in PIPT. Mentioned barriers included unwilling PN-behaviour, Dutch legislation, several medical considerations and inadequate skills of GPs. Also, concerns about limited knowledge of cultural sensitivity around PN and PT were raised. Mentioned facilitators of PIPT were reliable home based test-kits, phone-contact between professionals and notified partners, more consultation time for GPs or GPAs and additional training. The online questionnaire showed that SHC employees agreed that partners should be treated as soon as possible, but also that they were reluctant towards PIPT without counselling and testing. CONCLUSIONS: Professionals saw advantages in PIPT, but they also identified barriers hampering the potential introduction of PIPT. Improving PN and counselling skills with specific focus on cultural sensitivity is needed. PIPT could be considered for specific partners. PIPT in combination with home based testing and using e-healthcare should be further explored and developed.

Perceived Risk of Intimate Partner Violence Among STI Clinic Patients: Implications for Partner Notification and Patient-Delivered Partner Therapy.

Patient-delivered partner therapy (PDPT) is the practice of providing patients diagnosed with a bacterial sexually transmitted infection (STI) medication to give directly to their partner for treatment without requiring the partner to participate in diagnostic testing and counseling. Despite a growing body of evidence in support of PDPT, literature is limited to date on the influence of perceived risk of intimate partner violence (IPV) on PDPT use. We analyzed mixed-method data from 196 quantitative surveys (61% male, M age = 31.2, 92% Black or African-American) and 25 qualitative interviews to better understand the barriers and facilitators associated with PDPT delivery for patients attending a Midwestern, publicly funded STI clinic in the U.S. Nearly a third of surveyed patients (29; 34% of women, 26% of men) expressed worry about IPV when delivering PDPT. Patients had concerns about infidelity worry, embarrassment, and anxiety (referred to as IWEA hereafter) associated with partner notification and PDPT delivery. We found IWEA was highly correlated with IPV concerns in a fully adjusted logistic regression model. Women had 2.43 (95% CI = 1.09-5.42) times greater odds of worrying about IPV than men; other significant factors associated with IPV worry included higher condom use, no prior STI diagnosis, and being uninsured (as compared to having Medicare/Medicaid insurance). Encouraging communication between healthcare providers and their patients about the potential for IPV could facilitate patient triaging that results in the consideration of alternative partner referral mechanisms for patients or partners at risk of harm and better outcomes for patients and their partners.

Expedited Partner Therapy (EPT) increases the frequency of partner notification among MSM in Lima, Peru: a pilot randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Expedited Partner Therapy (EPT) has been shown to improve treatment outcomes among heterosexual partners of individuals with curable sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Although the use of EPT with men who have sex with men (MSM) has been debated, due to the potential for missed opportunities to diagnose unidentified cases of HIV and syphilis infection in symptomatic partners, increases in partner notification (PN) resulting from use of EPT may promote testing and treatment of otherwise unidentified partners. We assessed the impact of EPT on self-reported PN among MSM in Peru with gonorrheal (GC) and/or chlamydial (CT) infection. METHODS: We enrolled 173 MSM in Lima, Peru with symptomatic or asymptomatic GC and/or CT infection between 2012 and 2014. We enrolled 44 MSM with symptomatic urethritis/proctitis and 129 MSM with asymptomatic GC/CT infection, diagnosed based on nucleic acid testing (Aptima Combo 2 Transcription-Mediated Amplification [TMA]) from urethral, pharyngeal, and rectal sites. Eligible participants were randomly assigned to receive either standard PN counseling (n = 84) or counseling plus EPT (cefixime 400 mg/azithromycin 1 g) for up to five recent partners (n = 89). Self-reported notification was assessed by computer-assisted self-administered survey among 155 participants who returned for 14-day follow-up. RESULTS: The median age of participants was 26 (interquartile range [IQR]: 23-31) with a median of 3 sexual partners (IQR: 2-4) in the previous 30-day period. Among all participants, 111/155 (71.6%) notified at least one partner at 14-day follow-up with a median of 1 partner notified per participant (IQR: 0-2). For participants randomized to receive EPT, 69/83 (83.1%) reported notifying at least one partner, compared with 42/72 (58.3%) of participants in the control arm (odds ratio = 3.52; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.68-7.39). The proportion of all recent partners notified was significantly greater in the EPT than in the control arm (53.5%, 95% CI: 45.0-62.0% versus 36.4%, 95% CI: 27.0-47.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Provision of EPT led to significant increases in notification among Peruvian MSM diagnosed with GC/CT infection. Additional research is needed to assess the impact of EPT on biological outcomes, including persistent or recurrent infection, antimicrobial resistance, and HIV/STI transmission, in MSM sexual networks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01720654 . Registered on 10/29/2012.

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.

State-level gonorrhea rates and expedited partner therapy laws: insights from time series analyses.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we examined state-level monthly gonorrhea morbidity and assessed the potential impact of existing expedited partner therapy (EPT) laws in relation to the time that the laws were enacted. STUDY DESIGN: Longitudinal study. METHODS: We obtained state-level monthly gonorrhea morbidity (number of cases/100,000 for males, females and total) from the national surveillance data. We used visual examination (of morbidity trends) and an autoregressive time series model in a panel format with intervention (interrupted time series) analysis to assess the impact of state EPT laws based on the months in which the laws were enacted. RESULTS: For over 84% of the states with EPT laws, the monthly morbidity trends did not show any noticeable decreases on or after the laws were enacted. Although we found statistically significant decreases in gonorrhea morbidity within four of the states with EPT laws (Alaska, Illinois, Minnesota, and Vermont), there were no significant decreases when the decreases in the four states were compared contemporaneously with the decreases in states that do not have the laws. CONCLUSION: We found no impact (decrease in gonorrhea morbidity) attributable exclusively to the EPT law(s). However, these results do not imply that the EPT laws themselves were not effective (or failed to reduce gonorrhea morbidity), because the effectiveness of the EPT law is dependent on necessary intermediate events/outcomes, including sexually transmitted infection service providers' awareness and practice, as well as acceptance by patients and their partners.

Sexually Transmitted Infections in the Emergency Department.

As the United States faces a worsening epidemic of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), emergency departments (EDs) play a critical role in identifying and treating these infections. The growing health inequities in the distribution and disproportionate impact of STIs add to the urgency of providing high-quality sexual health care through the ED. Changes in population health are reflected in the new Centers for Disease Control recommendations on screening, diagnostic testing, and treatment of STIs. This review covers common, as well as and less common or emerging STIs, and discusses the state-of-the-art guidance on testing paradigms, extragenital sampling, and antimicrobial treatment and prevention of STIs.

Ability to Recontact Sex Partners and Partner Treatment Success Among Young Heterosexual Black Men With Chlamydia.

PURPOSE: Patient-delivered partner therapy (PDPT) allows index patients who test positive for Chlamydia trachomatis (Ct) to provide treatment to partners directly. PDPT is contingent upon an index being able to contact their partner. The aims of this study were to assess factors related to being able to contact a partner and being able to successfully deliver their treatment. METHODS: Participants were Black men who have sex with women aged 15-26 enrolled in a community Ct screening/treatment program in New Orleans, LA who tested positive for Ct and completed a computer-assisted survey. Factors associated with the index's ability to contact their recent sex partner(s) and to successfully deliver PDPT to his partner(s) were compared by characteristics of the relationship. RESULTS: Of 104 young men who tested positive for Ct, the median age was 20.3 years and information was reported on 184 female partners, of whom 143 (77.7%) were deemed contactable by the index. Only the index wanting to have sex with the partner again was significantly associated with their ability to contact the partner (odds ratio [OR] 5.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.18, 13.23). Only 72/184 (39.1%) partners received PDPT. The index being interested in sex with partner again (OR 2.54, 95% CI 1.23-5.27) was associated with greater odds of successful PDPT delivery whereas if index believed their partner had other partners, successful PDPT was less likely (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.26-0.99). There was low agreement between an index's ability to contact their partner and the delivery of PDPT (kappa = 0.04 [-0.062, 0.143). DISCUSSION: Asking patients if they can recontact prior sexual parters may be insufficient to ensure that their partners receive PDPT.

Approach to Managing Sex Partners of People with Sexually Transmitted Infections.

Partner management of sexually transmitted infection (STIs) is essential to identify and treat new cases, prevent reinfection in the index case, interrupt chains of transmission, reduce STI-related morbidity, and target STI screening and treatment interventions. The responsibility for partner notification and treatment falls on the health care provider. Approaches to partner management include patient referral, provider referral, contractual referral, and expedited partner therapy (EPT), with EPT and enhanced partner referral outperforming other methods. This article provides an overview of clinical recommendations regarding partner management, with particular emphasis on EPT, and an update on new and emerging evidence in the field.

Evaluation of Strategies to Improve Uptake of Expedited Partner Therapy for Chlamydia trachomatis Treatment in Minnesota: A Decision Analytic Model.

Background. Despite the established effectiveness of expedited partner therapy (EPT) in partner treatment of bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STI), the practice is underutilized. Objective. To estimate the relative effectiveness of strategies to increase EPT uptake (numbers of partners treated for chlamydia). Methods. We developed a care cascade model of cumulative probabilities to estimate the number of partners treated under strategies to increase EPT uptake in Minnesota. The care cascade model used data from clinical trials, population-based studies, and Minnesota chlamydia surveillance as well as in-depth interviews of health providers who regularly treat STI patients and a statewide survey of health providers across Minnesota. Results. Several strategies could improve EPT uptake among providers, including facilitating treatment payment (additional 1,932 partners treated) and implementing electronic health record reminders (additional 1,755 partners treated). Addressing concerns about liability would have the greatest effect, resulting in 2,187 additional partners treated. Conclusions. Providers expressed openness to offering EPT under several scenarios, which reflect differences in knowledge about EPT, its legality, and potential risks to patients. While addressing concerns about provider liability would have the greatest effect on number of partners treated, provider education and procedural changes could make a substantial impact. Highlights: Addressing provider concerns about expedited partner therapy (EPT) legality and its potential risks would result in the most partners treated for chlamydia.EPT alerts and electronic EPT prescriptions may also streamline partner treatment.Provider education about the legality of EPT and its potential risks and training in counseling patients on EPT could also increase uptake.

Challenges in Managing Gonorrhea and New Advances in Prevention.

Gonorrhea is the second most common bacterial sexually transmitted infection in the United States. Rates are increasing, and multiple challenges compound management, including worsening antimicrobial resistance. New therapeutics, enhanced screening and partner notification, and treatment through point-of-care testing and expedited partner therapy, as well as primary prevention efforts provide opportunities for success in combating these trends.

Impact of an Electronic Medical Record Best Practice Alert on Expedited Partner Therapy for Chlamydia Infection and Reinfection.

BACKGROUND: Atrius Health implemented a best practice alert (BPA) to encourage clinicians to provide expedited partner therapy (EPT) in October 2014. We assessed (1) the impact of the BPA on EPT provision and chlamydial reinfection and (2) the impact of EPT on testing for chlamydia reinfection and reinfection rates. METHODS: We included patients ≥15 years with ≥1 positive chlamydia test between January 2013 and March 2019. Tests-of-reinfection were defined as chlamydia tests 28-120 days after initial infection, and corresponding positive results were considered evidence of reinfection. We used interrupted time series analyses to identify changes in (1) frequency of EPT, (2) tests-of-reinfection, and (3) reinfections after the BPA was released. Log-binomial regression models, with generalized estimating equation methods, assessed associations between (1) EPT and tests-of-reinfection and (2) EPT and reinfection. RESULTS: Among 7267 chlamydia infections, EPT was given to 1475 (20%) patients. Expedited partner therapy frequency increased from 15% to 22% of infections between January 2013 and September 2014 (ß = 0.003, P = .03). After the BPA was released, EPT frequency declined to 19% of infections by March 2019 (ß = -0.004, P = .008). On average, 35% of chlamydia infections received a test-of-reinfection and 7% were reinfected; there were no significant changes in these percentages after BPA implementation. Patients given EPT were more likely to receive tests-of-reinfection (prevalence ratio [PR] 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.16) but without change in reinfections (PR 0.88; 95% CI, 0.66-1.17). CONCLUSIONS: Best practice alerts in electronic medical record systems may not be effective at increasing EPT prescribing and decreasing chlamydial reinfection. However, patients given EPT were more likely to receive a test of chlamydia reinfection.

Youth Knowledge and Perspectives on Expedited Partner Therapy.

PURPOSE: Expedited partner therapy (EPT) is an effective sexually transmitted infection (STI) treatment and prevention practice that allows clinicians to provide treatment to the sexual partner(s) of individuals diagnosed with chlamydia and/or gonorrhea infections without a clinical evaluation. Due to the high incidence of STIs among youth, we sought to understand youth awareness and beliefs about EPT use. METHODS: MyVoice, a national text message survey of youth aged 14-24 years, posed 5 questions on EPT knowledge and perceptions to 1,115 youth in August 2018. Responses were reviewed to identify themes and iteratively develop a codebook. Two reviewers independently coded each question, and a third reviewer resolved discrepancies. Summary statistics were calculated for demographic and thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 835 participants responded to at least 1 question (74.9% response rate). Majority of youth (91.9%, n = 730/794) felt that it would be important to help their partners get treatment if they tested positive for chlamydia or gonorrhea. Although most participants were unaware of EPT (86.4%, n = 657/760), 81.3% (n = 624/768) supported the policy stating that it is "pretty darn convenient." Youth also noted they would be interested in asking their provider for EPT. Participants opposing EPT (6.9%, n = 53/768) noted that "they [sexual partner] are responsible for their own health" and preferred to "tell my partner to go to [their] doctor." CONCLUSIONS: Most youth in the MyVoice cohort felt that EPT was a good way to get treatment for their partners, even though the majority were not aware that EPT was available as an STI treatment option.

Public health detailing to increase expedited partner therapy for chlamydia and gonorrhea in Maryland: Changes in awareness and implementation among prescribing community providers.

The objective of this evaluation was to assess the use of public health detailing in a pilot program to increase Expedited Partner Therapy (EPT) uptake among community-based providers in two Maryland jurisdictions. Public health detailing is a method designed to raise awareness and increase implementation of evidence-based clinical practices by delivering educational content via one-on-one meetings with providers. EPT is a voluntary clinical practice of treating all sexual partners of patients diagnosed with STIs by prescribing medications without the provider first examining said sexual partners. The aim of EPT is to prevent STI reinfection and reduce further transmission. From April 2017 to March 2019, detailers visited community-based health care practice sites to conduct EPT detailing with providers. The effectiveness of this program was evaluated by comparing provider responses from pre- to post-detailing surveys, administered six months after detailing. Survey responses assessed EPT awareness and practices, barriers to implementation, and satisfaction with detailing. The proportion of providers (170) aware of EPT for treating chlamydia and gonorrhea increased from 61.7% (114) to 99.4% (169) (p-value < 0.001). The proportion who reported prescribing EPT increased from 63.2% (72) to 86.4% (146) (p-value < 0.001). Providers reporting no barriers to prescribing EPT increased from 30.6% (52) to 55.9% (95) (p-value < 0.001). Most providers were satisfied with detailing, 95.5% (164), and 95.3% (162) preferred this method to communicate about public health measures. Detailing appears to be a strategy to improve provider awareness of EPT, increase EPT implementation, and reduce barriers to prescribing EPT.

Sexually Transmitted Diseases in the Emergency Department.

Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) continue to be underrecognized leading to devastating health and economic consequences. Emergency clinicians play an important role in diagnosing and managing STDs and in improving health care outcomes for both the patient and their partners. In addition, antibiotic resistance and emerging infections continue to challenge providers in clinical practice. This review focuses on the cause, history, physical examination, diagnostic studies, and treatment strategies for bacterial vaginosis, chlamydia, genital herpes, gonorrhea, human papillomavirus, granuloma inguinale, Lymphogranuloma Venereum, Mycoplasma genitalium, syphilis, and trichomoniasis.

Patient-Delivered Expedited Partner Therapy for Chlamydia trachomatis Infection Among Female Adolescents Using School-Based Health Centers.

INTRODUCTION: Expedited partner therapy (EPT) may reduce Chlamydia trachomatis reinfection. This pilot study was conducted to determine if female adolescents with C. trachomatis accept and deliver EPT to male sexual partners and whether it is associated with decreased C. trachomatis reinfection rates at 3 and 6 months. METHOD: Forty-six female adolescents, aged 13 to 19years and diagnosed with C. trachomatis at two urban school-based health centers, participated in four visits over 6 months. Participants completed a self-administered self-efficacy scale and a sexual risk behavior and EPT questionnaire and were retested for C. trachomatis 3 and 6 months after treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 65% accepted EPT, and 73% of those who accepted EPT delivered EPT to their partners. Eighty percent completed the 3-month visit, of these, 30% tested positive for C. trachomatis; 57% completed the 6-month visit, and of these, 15% tested positive for C. trachomatis. Acceptance of EPT was associated with reductions in C.trachomatis reinfection at 3 months (p = .04) but not at 6 months (p = .10). Delivery of EPT was not associated with reductions in C. trachomatis reinfection at 3 or 6 months (p = .08 and p = .44, respectively). Self-efficacy scales did not predict acceptance and delivery of EPT. DISCUSSION: Although two-thirds of participants accepted EPT and acceptance of EPT was associated with reductions in C. trachomatis reinfection at 3 months, rates of reinfection were high. Implications of these findings are limited by the small sample size. Larger studies are needed to understand potential barriers to delivery of EPT.