Patient Demographics and the Utilization of a Novel 3-Anatomic-Site Testing Panel Including Rectal Self-Collection as Compared With Usual Care Testing.

BACKGROUND: At Kaiser Permanente Mid-Atlantic States, we designed a 3-anatomic-site panel (urine, oropharynx, and rectum) with a self-collect feature for rectal sites. We compared the proportion tested at each anatomic site, demographic factors, and HIV status between those who received the 3-site panel versus usual care. METHODS: Patients entered our laboratories without a prior appointment and underwent urine (usual care [patient collected]), oropharynx (laboratory technician collected), and rectal site (patient collected) testing. Providers recommended the panel to their patients. Patients then had the choice to accept or to reject the panel. Multivariate and logistic regressions were conducted to explore the relationship of age, sex, race, and HIV status with Neisseria gonorrhoeae (GC) and Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) test results as well as the type of testing (3-site panel vs. usual care testing) received. RESULTS: A total of 145,854 patients received usual care testing as compared with 9227 who received the panel. For those who underwent usual care testing, 4.0% tested positive for CT and 0.85% for GC. For those who received the panel, 9.1% tested positive for CT and 6.4% for GC. Those who received the 3-site panel were more likely to test positive for CT (odds ratio [OR], 2.70; confidence interval [CI], 2.46-2.97) and GC (OR, 4.00; CI, 3.59-4.64). White patients were the most likely to receive the panel compared with Black patients (OR, 3.14; CI, 2.96-3.33). Patients with HIV had greater odds of undergoing the panel (OR, 15.62; CI, 14.67-16.64) and of testing positive for CT (OR, 1.27; CI, 1.07-1.51) and GC (OR, 1.39; CI, 1.14-1.68). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received the panel had higher odds of testing positive for CT and GC compared with patients with usual testing. Physician training may address the racial and sex differences observed in the panel enrollment and increase utilization. Self-collection for rectal sites should lead to higher detection of CT and GC.

Development of Maryland Local Overdose Fatality Review Teams: A Localized, Interdisciplinary Approach to Combat the Growing Problem of Drug Overdose Deaths.

The Maryland Local Overdose Fatality Review Teams (LOFRTs) are multiagency, multidisciplinary teams that critically analyze individual cases of drug overdose in their jurisdictions to identify preventable risk factors and missed opportunities for intervention, and to make policy and programmatic recommendations to prevent future overdose deaths. Three Maryland LOFRTs were first piloted in early 2014, and became established in law in May of the same year. LOFRTs provide unique opportunities for enhanced interagency collaboration and locally driven prevention efforts. This study describes the process of establishing LOFRTs in Maryland. The experiences and information regarding LOFRTs may help counties in other states combat the growing problem of deaths by drug overdose.

Sharing Overdose Data Across State Agencies to Inform Public Health Strategies: A Case Study.

Data sharing and analysis are important components of coordinated and cost-effective public health strategies. However, legal and policy barriers have made data from different agencies difficult to share and analyze for policy development. To address a rise in overdose deaths, Maryland used an innovative and focused approach to bring together data on overdose decedents across multiple agencies. The effort was focused on developing discrete intervention points based on information yielded on decedents' lives, such as vulnerability upon release from incarceration. Key aspects of this approach included gubernatorial leadership, a unified commitment to data sharing across agencies with memoranda of understanding, and designation of a data management team. Preliminary results have yielded valuable insights and have helped inform policy. This process of navigating legal and privacy concerns in data sharing across multiple agencies may be applied to a variety of public health problems challenging health departments across the country.