Opportunistic and systematic screening for chlamydia: a study of consultations by young adults in general practice

BACKGROUND: Opportunistic screening for genital chlamydia infection is being introduced in England, but evidence for the effectiveness of this approach is lacking. There are insufficient data about young peoples' use of primary care services to determine the potential coverage of opportunistic screening in comparison with a systematic population-based approach. AIM: To estimate use of primary care services by young men and women; to compare potential coverage of opportunistic chlamydia screening with a systematic postal approach. DESIGN OF STUDY: Population based cross-sectional study. SETTING: Twenty-seven general practices around Bristol and Birmingham. METHOD: A random sample of patients aged 16-24 years were posted a chlamydia screening pack. We collected details of face-to-face consultations from general practice records. Survival and person-time methods were used to estimate the cumulative probability of attending general practice in 1 year and the coverage achieved by opportunistic and systematic postal chlamydia screening. RESULTS: Of 12 973 eligible patients, an estimated 60.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 58.3 to 62.5%) of men and 75.3% (73.7 to 76.9%) of women aged 16-24 years attended their practice at least once in a 1-year period. During this period, an estimated 21.3% of patients would not attend their general practice but would be reached by postal screening, 9.2% would not receive a postal invitation but would attend their practice, and 11.8% would be missed by both methods. CONCLUSIONS: Opportunistic and population-based approaches to chlamydia screening would both fail to contact a substantial minority of the target group, if used alone. A pragmatic approach combining both strategies might achieve higher coverage.

Chlamydia prevalence in young attenders of rural and regional primary care services in Australia: a cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVE To estimate chlamydia prevalence among 16-29-year-olds attending general practice clinics in Australia. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING A cross-sectional survey was conducted from May 2010 to December 2012. Sexually experienced 16-29-year-olds were recruited from 134 general practice clinics in 54 rural and regional towns in four states and in nine metropolitan clinics (consecutive patients were invited to participate). Participants completed a questionnaire and were tested for chlamydia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Chlamydia prevalence. RESULTS Of 4284 participants, 197 tested positive for chlamydia (4.6%; 95% CI, 3.9%-5.3%). Prevalence was similar in men (5.2% [65/1257]; 95% CI, 3.9%-6.4%) and women (4.4% [132/3027]; 95% CI, 3.5%-5.2%) (P = 0.25) and high in those reporting genital symptoms or a partner with a sexually transmissible infection (STI) - 17.0% in men (8/47; 95% CI, 2.8%-31.2%); 9.5% in women (16/169; 95% CI, 5.1%-13.8%). Nearly three-quarters of cases (73.4% [130/177]) were diagnosed in asymptomatic patients attending for non-sexual health reasons, and 83.8% of all participants (3258/3890) had attended for non-sexual health reasons. Prevalence was slightly higher in participants from rural and regional areas (4.8% [179/3724]; 95% CI, 4.0%-5.6%) than those from metropolitan areas (3.1% [17/548]; 95% CI, 1.5%-4.7%) (P = 0.08). In multivariable analysis, increasing partner numbers in previous 12 months (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] for three or more partners, 5.11 [95% CI, 2.35-11.08]), chlamydia diagnosis in previous 12 months (AOR, 4.35 [95% CI, 1.52-12.41]) and inconsistent condom use with most recent partner (AOR, 2.90 [95% CI, 1.31-6.40]) were significantly associated with chlamydia in men. In women, increasing partner numbers in previous 12 months (AOR for two partners, 2.59 [95% CI, 1.59-4.23]; AOR for three or more partners, 3.58 [95% CI, 2.26-5.68]), chlamydia diagnosis in previous 12 months (AOR, 3.13 [95% CI, 1.62-6.06]) and age (AOR for 25-29-year-olds, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.12-0.44]) were associated with chlamydia. CONCLUSIONS Chlamydia prevalence is similar in young men and women attending general practice. Testing only those with genital symptoms or a partner with an STI would have missed three-quarters of cases. Most men and women are amenable to being tested in general practice, even in rural and regional areas.