Should asymptomatic men be included in chlamydia screening programs? Cost-effectiveness of chlamydia screening among male and female entrants to a national job training program
UMass Chan Affiliations
Department of PediatricsDocument Type
Journal ArticlePublication Date
2008-01-25Keywords
AdolescentAdult
Chlamydia Infections
control
*Chlamydia trachomatis
Cohort Studies
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Employment
Female
Humans
Male
Mass Screening
*Patient Selection
United States
Urinalysis
Vaginal Smears
Pediatrics
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost-effectiveness of various chlamydia screening strategies within a population of male and female youth entering a national job training program. STUDY DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis of various chlamydia screening strategies among a cohort of 4000 female and male New England job training students. Strategies for women include (a) no screening, (b) universal endocervical DNA probe screening, (c) universal urine based NAAT screening, and (d) universal endocervical NAAT screening. Strategies for men include (a) no screening, (b) selective urine NAAT screening of leukocyte esterase (LE)-positive urines, and (c) universal urine-based NAAT screening. RESULTS: Universal endocervical NAAT screening of women and universal urine NAAT screening of men were the most effective and cost-effective strategies individually and in combination. Endocervical NAAT screening of women prevented 23 more cases of PID and saved $27,000 more than endocervical DNA probe screening. Likewise, universal urine NAAT screening of men prevented 21 more cases of PID in their female partners and saved $16,000 more than selective urine NAAT screening of LE positive men. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a sensitive NAAT to screen both men and women for chlamydia upon entry to a National Job Training Program is cost-effective, cost-saving, and provides a public health opportunity to substantially reduce chlamydia infections among youth at risk for sexually transmitted diseases.Source
Sex Transm Dis. 2008 Jan;35(1):91-101. Link to article on publisher's websiteDOI
10.1097/OLQ.0b013e31814b86f5Permanent Link to this Item
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/43113PubMed ID
18217229Related Resources
Link to Article in PubMedae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1097/OLQ.0b013e31814b86f5