Skip to main content

Table 3 Strategies and outcomes of home-based CT and NG screening studies published between Jan 2005-Jan 2011 classified by program type

From: Home-based chlamydia and gonorrhoea screening: a systematic review of strategies and outcomes

Author, year

Country

Target group, recruitment

Sex

Tests

Participation

Specimen return

Testing rate

CT positive

NG positive

Age

 

rate % (95% CI)

rate % (95% CI)

% (95% CI)

% (95% CI)

%(95% CI)

Outreach Programs (n=7)

Datta, 2007 [31]

US

Screening within a national surveyA

M/F;

6632

83.0

91.7

76.1

3.6%

0.5%

14-39

 

(82.2-83.8)

(91.1-92.4)

(75.2-77.0)

(3.2-4.1)

(0.4-0.8)

McCadden, 2005 [32]

Brittain (UK)

Randomly selected (national surveyB)

M/F;

3608

71.1

99.4

70.7

2.0%

 

18-44

 

(69.8-72.3)

(99.1-99.7)

(69.4-71.9)

(1.6-2.5)

 

Ghebremichael, 2009 [33]

Tanzania

Randomly selected households

F;

1439

92.1

71.3

65.6

1.5%

0.2%

20-24

 

(90.9-93.2)

(69.2-73.2)

(63.6-67.6)

(1.0-2.3)

(0.0-0.6)

Forhan, 2009 [34]

US

Screening within a national survey A

F;

793

 

94.6

 

3.9 C

 

14-19

  

(92.9-96.1)

   

Jennings, 2010 [35]

US

Randomly selected households; Monetary incentives

M/F;

587

87.8

98.3

86.4

  

15-24

 

(85.1-90.2)

(97.0-99.2)

(83.6-88.9)

  

Adams, 2008 [36]

Barbados

Randomly selected (voter’s register)

M/F;

402D

82.3%

100

82.3

11.3%

1.8%

18-35

 

(78.6-85.5)

(99.1-100)

(78.6-85.5)

(8.4-14.9)

(0.7-3.6)

Mir, 2009 [37]

Pakistan

Randomly selected households in a survey

M;

256

   

0.0%

0.8%

16-45

     

(0.1-2.8)

Programs with PTKs sent on invitation acceptance (n=7)

*Van Bergen, 2010 [38]

Nether-lands

Participants form population register, PTKs requested through internet; Reminders

M/F;

41638

20.2

78.9

16.0

4.2%

 

16-29

 

(20.1-20.4)

(78.6-79.3)

(15.8-16.1)

(4.0-4.4)

 

Goulet, 2010 [39]

France

Randomly selected (national survey); Reminders

M/F;

2580

76.3

68.3

52.0

1.7%

 

18-44

 

(75.0-77.4)

(66.7-69.7)

(50.6-53.4)

(1.2-2.2)

 

*Anderson, 2010 [40]

Denmark

Randomly selected (county health service register)

M/F;

912

  

20.3

7.0%

 

22-24

   

(19.1-21.5)

(5.4-8.9)

 

Hocking, 2006 [41]

Australia

Random household sample (telephone directory)

F;

657

53.9 E

67.1

36.2E

0.9%

 

18-35

 

(51.6-56.2)

(64.1-70.0)

(33.9-38.4)

(0.3-2.0)

 

Domeika, 2007 [42]

Sweden

Randomly selected (population register, student register); Advertised

M/F;

247

14.5

88.2

12.8

2.0%

 

19-23

 

(12.9-16.1)

(83.8-91.7)

(11.3-14.3)

(0.7-4.7)

 

*Scholes, 2007 [43]

US

Participants from enrollees in a managed care plan; Reminders

M;

105

  

3.6

1.0%

 

21-25

   

(2.9-4.3)

(0.0-5.2)

 

Eggleston, 2005 [44]

US

Telephone accessible households; Monetary incentive; Reminders

M/F;

86

 

86.0

 

2.3%

0.0%

18-35

  

(77.6-92.1)

 

(0.3-8.1)

 

Programs with PTKs sent along with invitation (n=5)

Van Bergen, 2005 [45]

Nether-lands

Randomly selected (civilian registry); Reminders

M/F;

8383

 

40.3**

39.9

2.0%

 

15-29

  

(39.7-41.0)

(39.3-40.6)

(1.7-2.3)

 

Low, 2007 [46]

England

Randomly selected (general practice lists); Reminders

M/F;

4731

 

32.9**

23.9

4.6%

 

16-39

  

(32.1-33.7)

(23.3-24.5)

(4.0-5.3)

 

*Anderson, 2010 [40]

Denmark

Randomly selected (county health service register)

M/F;

1296

 

28.8

28.8

6.2%

 

22-24

  

(27.5-30.1)

(27.5-30.1)

(4.9-7.6)

 

Uuskula, 2008 [47]

Estonia

Randomly selected (population registry)

M/F;

486

 

34.8**

28.8

5.1%

 

18-35

  

(32.3-37.4)

(26.7-31.0)

(3.4-7.5)

 

*Scholes, 2007 [43]

US

Participants from enrollees in a managed care plan; Reminders

M;

230

 

7.8 (6.9-8.9)

7.8

2.6%

 

21-25

   

(6.9-8.9)

(1.0-5.6)

 

PTKs without invitation programs (n=4)

Gaydos, 2009 [48]

US

PTKs requested through the internet; Advertised

F;

1203

 

32.4

 

9.1%

1.3%

>=14

  

(30.9-33.9)

 

(7.5-10.8)

(0.8-2.2)

Novak, 2006 [49]

Sweden

PTKs requested through the internet; Advertised

M/F

906

 

62.5

 

5.2%

 
   

(59.9-65.0)

 

(3.8-6.8)

 

Chai, 2010 [50]

US

PTKs requested through the internet; Advertised

M;

512

 

31.1

 

12.8

0.8%

>=14

  

(28.9-33.4)

 

(10.0-16.0)

(0.02-2.0)

Martin, 2009 [51]

Australia

PTKs requested through the internet/phone, specimens dropped-off; Advertised

M/F;

45

 

22.0

   

16-24

  

(16.5-28.2)

   

PTKs with in-person invitation programs (n=4)

Brabin, 2009 [52]

England

PTKs offered to women requesting EHC at pharmacies

F;

264

46.4

19.7

9.1

9.1%

 

<=24

 

(44.6-48.3)

(17.6-21.9)

(8.1-10.2)

(5.9-13.2)

 

Sacks-Davis, 2010 [53]

Australia

People at a music festival invited to receive PTKs; Non-monetary incentive; Reminders

M/F;

67

34.7

21.4

7.4

1.5%

 

16-29

 

(31.6-37.9)

(17.0-26.4)

(5.4-9.3)

(0.0-8.0)

 

Dabrera, 2010 [54]

England

PTKs offered to women requesting EHC at pharmacies

F;

7

66.7

87.5

58.3

  

<=21

 

(34.9-90.1)

(47.3-99.7)

(27.7-84.8)

  

Rose, 2010 [55]

New Zealand

PTKs offered to general practice clients to pass to their social contacts

M/F

3

   

0.0%

 

PTKs with pick-up programs (n=3)

Davison, 2007 [56]

Scotland

PTKs picked-up from GUM clinic, youth service, family planning clinic etc.

M/F

799

 

20.2

 

9.0%

 
   

(18.9-21.5)

 

(7.1-11.2)

 

MHF, 2005 [57]

England

PTKs (pick-up) were available to employees at 6 workplaces; Advertised

M;

285 F

 

12.1

 

1.8%

 

<=30

  

(10.8-13.5)

 

(0.6-4.0)

 

MHF, 2005 [57]

England

PTKs available for pick-up at 5 non-clinical sites

M;

83

 

18.6G

   

<=30

  

(15.1-22.5)

   

Programs with multiple strategies (n=2)

Williamson, 2007 [58]

Scotland

PTKs distributed or picked-up at various locations

M/F;

2295H

   

11.1%

 

13-25

    

(9.9-12.5)

 

Buhrer-Skinner, 2009 [59]

Australia

PTKs requested through internet/phone or picked-up at different locations; Advertised

M/F;

100

   

7.3%

 

16-25

    

(3.0-14.4)

 
  1. Definitions and abbreviations: Participation rate, participants divided by number invited × 100; Specimen return rate, number of specimens (or tests) divided by participants × 100; Testing rate, number of specimens divided by number invited × 100. CT, Chlamydia trachomatis; NG, Neisseria gonorrhoeae; M, Male; F, Female; US, United States; UK, United Kingdom; PTK, postal test kit; GUM, genitourinary medicine; MHF, Men’s Health Forum.
  2. * Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) ** calculated among those who received PTKs (excluded undelivered kits).
  3. A National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES); B National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal); C weighted CT prevalence; D 397 valid tests; E calculated among 1817 eligible contactable participants after excluding 6555 ineligible and 2629 un-contactable out of 11001 households sampled; F although the program was targeted at male employees, some of the specimens were returned by female employees; G specimen return rates for individual locations: Agricultural college, 41.0% (41 tests); Factory, 36.0% (9); Satellite college of university, 14.3% (4); Military Police training center 13.6% (12); Post-16 college 8.3% (17); H 20% of returned kits were distributed from clinics and 10% were picked-up form university.