Rationale, design, and results of the first screening round of a comprehensive, register-based, Chlamydia screening implementation programme in the Netherlands

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Jan EAM van Bergen (1)
  Johannes SA Fennema (2)
  Ingrid VF van den Broek (5)
  Elfi EHG Brouwers (4)
  Eva M de Feijter (1)
  Christian JPA Hoebe (4)
  Rik H Koekenbier (2)
  Eline LM Op de Coul (5)
  Sander M van Ravesteijn (3)
  Hannelore M G?tz (3)
  
• 刊名：BMC Infectious Diseases
• 出版年：2010
• 出版时间：December 2010
• 年：2010
• 卷：10
• 期：1
• 全文大小：1600KB
• 参考文献：1. Peipert JF: Genital Chlamydia infections. / N Engl J Med 2003, 349:2424-430. CrossRef
  2. Land JA, van Bergen JEAM, Morre SA, Postma MJ: Epidemiology of Chlamydia trachomatis infection in women and the cost-effectiveness of screening. / Human Reproduction Update 2010, 16:189-04. CrossRef
  3. Van Bergen JEAM, G?tz HM, Richardus JH, Hoebe CJ, Broer J, Coenen AJ: Prevalence of urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis increases significantly with level of urbanisation and suggests targeted screening approaches: results from the first national population based study in the Netherlands. / Sex Transm Infect 2005, 81:17-3. CrossRef
  4. G?tz HM, van Bergen JE, Veldhuijzen IK, Broer J, Hoebe CJ, Steyerberg EW, Coenen AJ, de Groot F, Verhooren MJ, van Schaik DT: A prediction rule for selective screening of Chlamydia trachomatis infection. / Sex Transm Infect 2005, 81:24-0. CrossRef
  5. Gezondheidsraad: Jaarbericht Gezondheidsonderzoek: / Den Haag Gezondheidsraad Publicatie [The Hague Health Council Publication]. 2006., 10:
  6. Scholes D, Stergachis A, Heidrich FE, Andrilla H, Holmes KK, Stamm WE: Prevention of pelvic inflammatory disease by screening for Chlamydia infection. / New Engl J Med 1996, 334:1362-366. CrossRef
  7. ?stergaard L, Andersen B, Moller JK, Olesen F: Home sampling versus conventional swab sampling for screening of Chlamydia trachomatis in women: A cluster-randomized 1-year follow-up study. / Clin Infect Dis 2000, 31:951-7. CrossRef
  8. Oakeshott P, Keery S, Aghaizu A, Atherton H, Hay S, Taylor-Robinson D, Simms I, Hay P: Community-based trial of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis to prevent pelvic inflammatory disease: the POPI (prevention of pelvic infection) trial. / BMJ 2010, 340:c1642. CrossRef
  9. Low N, Egger M, Sterne JAC, Harbord RM, Ibrahim F, Lindblom B, Herrmann B: Incidence of severe reproductive tract complications associated with diagnosed genital Chlamydia infection: the Uppsala Women's Cohort Study. / Sex Transm Infect 2000, 82:212-18. CrossRef
  10. Andersen B, Olesen F, Moller JK, Ostergaard L: Population-based strategies for outreach screening of urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis infections: a randomized, controlled trial. / J Infect Dis 2002, 185:252-58. CrossRef
  11. Editorial: Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis. Opportunistic approaches have little evidence to support them. / BMJ 2007, 334:703-04.
  12. Low N, Bender N, Nartey L, Redmond S, Shang A, Stephenson JM: Effectiveness of Chlamydia screening: systemic review. / Int J Epidemiol 2009, 38:435-48. CrossRef
  13. G?tz HM, Veldhuijzen IK, van Bergen JE, Hoebe CJ, de Zwart O, Richardus JH, van Bergen JE, Broer J, Coenen AJ: Acceptability and consequences of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis by homebased urine testing. / Sex Transm Dis 2005, 32:557-62. CrossRef
  14. Hart GJ, Duncan B, Fenton KA: Chlamydia screening and sexual health: are we failing heterosexual men? / Sex Transm Infect 2002, 78:396-. CrossRef
  15. Kretzschmar M, Turner KM, Barton PM, Edmunds WJ, Low N: Predicting the population impact of chlamydia screening programmes: comparative mathematical modelling study. / Sex Transm Infect 2009, 85:359-6. CrossRef
  16. van den Broek IVF, Hoebe CAB, van Bergen JEAM, Brouwers E, Fennema JSA, G?tz HM, Hoebe CJPA, Koekenbier RH, van Ravesteijn SM, Op de Coul ELM: Evaluation design of a systematic, selective, internet-based, Chlamydia screening implementation in the Netherlands, 2008-010: implications of first results for the analysis. / BMC Infectious Diseases 2010, 10:89. CrossRef
  17. Op de Coul ELM, Weenen TC, van der Sande MAB, van den Broek IVF: Process evaluation of the chlamydia screening implementation in the Netherlands: phase 1. Challenges and opportunities during preparation and first operational phase. [http://www.rivm.nl/bibliotheek/rapporten/210261006.html] / RIVM 2006, report number 210261006, RIVM Bilthoven, The Netherlands
  18. De Graaf H, Meijer S, Poelman J, Van wesenbeeck I: Seks onder je 25e. Seksuele gezondheid van jongeren in Nederland anno 2005. / Rutgers Nisso Groep, Utrecht 2005 The Netherlands
  19. Veldhuijzen IK, Van Bergen JE, G?tz HM, Hoebe CJ, Morré SA, Richardus JH, PILOT CT Study Group: Reinfections, persistent infections and new infections after general population screening for chlamydia trachomatis in the Netherlands. / Sex Transm Dis 2005, 32:599-04. CrossRef
  20. Scott Lamontagne D, Baster K, Emmett L, Nichols T, Randall S, McLean L, Meredith P, Harindra V, Tobin JM, Underhill GS, Graham Hewitt W, Hopwood J, Gleave T, Ghosh AK, Mallinson H, Davies AR, Hughes G, Fenton KA: Incidence and reinfection rates of genital Chlamydia infection among women aged 16-4 years attending general practice, family planning and genitourinary medicine clinics in England A prospective cohort study. / Sex Transm Dis 2007, 83:292-03.
  21. G?tz HM, Hoebe CJ, Van Bergen JE, Veldhuijzen IK, Broer J, De Groot F, Verhooren MJ, Van Schaik DT, Coenen AJ, Richardus JH: Management of Chlamydia cases and their partners: results from a home-based screening program organized by municipal health services with referral to regular health care. / Sex Transm Dis 2005, 32:625-. CrossRef
  22. Batteiger BE, Wannzlu T, Ofner S, / et al.: Repeated Chlamydia Trachomatis Genital Infections in Adolescent women. / Journal of Infectious Diseases 2010, 201:42-1. CrossRef
  23. Voelker R: Experts reconsider wisdom of limiting Chlamydia screening only to women. / JAMA 2010, 303:823. CrossRef
  24. The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/10/293/prepub
  
• 作者单位：Jan EAM van Bergen (1)
  Johannes SA Fennema (2)
  Ingrid VF van den Broek (5)
  Elfi EHG Brouwers (4)
  Eva M de Feijter (1)
  Christian JPA Hoebe (4)
  Rik H Koekenbier (2)
  Eline LM Op de Coul (5)
  Sander M van Ravesteijn (3)
  Hannelore M G?tz (3)
  
  1. STI AIDS Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  2. Amsterdam Public Health Service, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  5. Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
  4. Department of Infectious Diseases, South Limburg Public Health Service, Geleen, The Netherlands
  3. Rotterdam Rijnmond Public Health Service, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
  

文摘

Background Implementing Chlamydia trachomatis screening in the Netherlands has been a point of debate for several years. The National Health Council advised against implementing nationwide screening until additional data collected from a pilot project in 2003 suggested that screening by risk profiles could be effective. A continuous increase in infections recorded in the national surveillance database affirmed the need for a more active approach. Here, we describe the rationale, design, and implementation of a Chlamydia screening demonstration programme. Methods A systematic, selective, internet-based Chlamydia screening programme started in April 2008. Letters are sent annually to all 16 to 29-year-old residents of Amsterdam, Rotterdam, and selected municipalities of South Limburg. The letters invite sexually active persons to login to http://www.chlamydiatest.nl with a personal code and to request a test kit. In the lower prevalence area of South Limburg, test kits can only be requested if the internet-based risk assessment exceeds a predefined value. Results We sent invitations to 261,025 people in the first round. One-fifth of the invitees requested a test kit, of whom 80% sent in a sample for testing. The overall positivity rate was 4.2%. Conclusions This programme advances Chlamydia control activities in the Netherlands. Insight into the feasibility, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and impact of this large-scale screening programme will determine whether the programme will be implemented nationally.