CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 26Reproductive tract infections researchHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsReproductive Health and Contraception

Chlamydia partner services for females in California family planning clinics.

Yu, Ying-Ying, Frasure-Williams, Jessica A., Dunne, Eileen F., Bolan, Gail, Markowitz, Lauri, Bauer, Heidi M.·2011·Sexually Transmitted Diseases
DOI 10.1097/olq.0b013e3182240366
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prompt treatment of exposed partners is critical for preventing further transmission of chlamydia, reinfection, and sequelae among females. Patient-delivered partner therapy (PDPT) has been allowable in California since 2001; however, few data are available regarding PDPT use and treatment outcomes. METHODS: Eight family planning clinics participated in a partner services evaluation from 2005 to 2006. Females aged 16 to 35 years with chlamydia were interviewed to determine the partner service received and partner treatment outcomes; a subset of partners was also interviewed. Determinants of reported partner treatment were assessed using multivariate logistic regression. Selected medical records were reviewed to assess reinfection rates. RESULTS: Overall, 743 female patients disclosed 952 partners; 58% of whom were identified as steady partners. Reported partner services included concurrent patient-partner treatment visits (15% of partners), PDPT (19%), patient referral (55%), health department referral (0.1%), and no partner management (11%). On the basis of patient report, 82% of partners were notified and 54% received treatment. Of the 166 (17%) partners interviewed, 139 (84%) reported that they had received treatment, which correlated well with patient report. Reported partner treatment was higher for concurrent treatment visits and PDPT (79% and 80%, respectively) compared to patient referral (44%, P < 0.0001). Adjusted for clinic and relationship status, partners managed with concurrent treatment visits or PDPT were more likely to receive treatment compared with partners managed with patient referral (adjusted odds ratios, 3.5; 95% confidence interval, 2.1-5.8 and adjusted odds ratios, 4.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.6-7.2, respectively). Among the patients retested within 6 months after treatment, 18% were reinfected; reinfection rates did not differ by type of partner service. CONCLUSIONS: Although overall rates of reported partner treatment were low, concurrent patient-partner treatment visits and PDPT were associated with significantly higher rates of partner treatment. However, these methods may be underutilized in California family planning settings.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/olq.0b013e3182240366

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Concurrent treatment of a main sex partner can be effective.

    “Although this approach can be effective for a main partner (116,117), it might not be a feasible approach for additional sex partners.”

    From Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021 (2021) · cites this paper as [116]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Yu, Y.-Y., Frasure-Williams, J. A., Dunne, E. F., Bolan, G., Markowitz, L., & Bauer, H. M.
Affiliations
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
  • California Department of Public Health (US)
Corresponding author
  • Yu, Ying-Ying
  • Frasure-Williams, Jessica A.
  • Bolan, Gail
  • Bauer, Heidi M.
ORCID
Venue
Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2011-10
Volume
38
Issue
10
Pages
913-918
ISSN
0148-5717 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/olq.0b013e3182240366
OpenAlex
W2020030956
Cited by
26
References
23
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 4
FWCI
2.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Sexually Transmitted Diseases (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Public Health Service (H25/CCH904362-13-05)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
Keywords
chlamydia, patient-delivered partner therapy, partner notification, partner treatment, reinfection, family planning clinics, women, referral
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Ambulatory Care Facilities, Anti-Bacterial Agents, California, Chlamydia, Chlamydia Infections, Female, Humans, Male, Referral and Consultation, Sex Education, Sexual Partners, Multivariate Analysis, Confidence Intervals, Logistic Models, Odds Ratio, Contact Tracing, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review