Abstract

BackgroundCommunity-based screening may be one solution to increase testing and treatment of sexually transmitted infections in sexually active teenagers, but there are few data on the practicalities and cost of running such a service. We estimate the cost of running a ‘Test n Treat’ service providing rapid chlamydia (CT) and gonorrhoea (NG) testing and same day on-site CT treatment in technical colleges.MethodsProcess data from a 2016/17 cluster randomised feasibility trial were used to estimate total costs and service uptake. Pathway mapping was used to model different uptake scenarios. Participants, from six London colleges, provided self-taken genitourinary samples in the nearest toilet. Included in the study were 509 sexually active students (mean 85/college): median age 17.9 years, 49% male, 50% black ethnicity, with a baseline CT and NG prevalence of 6 and 0.5%, respectively. All participants received information about CT and NG infections at recruitment. When the Test n Treat team visited, participants were texted/emailed invitations to attend for confidential testing. Three colleges were randomly allocated the intervention, to host (non-incentivised) Test n Treat one and four months after baseline. All six colleges hosted follow-up Test n Treat seven months after baseline when students received a £10 incentive (to participate).ResultsThe mean non-incentivised daily uptake per college was 5 students (range 1 to 17), which cost £237 (range £1082 to £88) per student screened, and £4657 (range £21,281 to £1723) per CT infection detected, or £13,970 (range £63,842 to £5169) per NG infection detected.The mean incentivised daily uptake was 19 students which cost £91 per student screened, and £1408/CT infection or £7042/NG infection detected.If daily capacity for screening were achieved (49 students/day), costs including incentives would be £47 per person screened and £925/CT infection or £2774/NG infection detected.ConclusionsDelivering non-incentivised Test n Treat in technical colleges is more expensive per person screened than CT and NG screening in clinics. Targeting areas with high infection rates, combined with high, incentivised uptake could make costs comparable.Trial registrationISRCTN58038795, Assigned August 2016, registered prospectively.

Highlights

  • Community-based screening may be one solution to increase testing and treatment of sexually transmitted infections in sexually active teenagers, but there are few data on the practicalities and cost of running such a service

  • Delivering non-incentivised Test n Treat in technical colleges is more expensive per person screened than Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) screening in clinics

  • We provided information about the risks of CT/NG and explained that as these baseline samples would not be tested for 7 months all participants should seek sexually transmitted infections (STI) testing at a sexual health clinic or from their family doctor independently of the trial

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Community-based screening may be one solution to increase testing and treatment of sexually transmitted infections in sexually active teenagers, but there are few data on the practicalities and cost of running such a service. Uptake of testing in many countries is too low to reduce infection rates, and there may be delays in obtaining treatment. Self-collected vaginal swabs (for females) and first void urine samples (for males) are ideal sample types for CT and NG testing. Combining this with portable point of care (POC) rapid test platforms gives potential to test for these infections in a variety of community settings, allowing people to receive results on the same day as testing. There is an urgent need for real life data to explore the economics and practicalities of screening and treatment of STIs in the community

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call