Article

Home-based versus clinic-based self-sampling and testing for sexually transmitted infections in Gugulethu, South Africa: randomised controlled trial.

Population Council, New York, USA.
Sexually transmitted infections (Impact Factor: 3.08). 01/2008; 83(7):552-7. DOI: 10.1136/sti.2007.027060
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To test whether more women are screened for sexually transmitted infections when offered home-based versus clinic-based testing and to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of self-sampling and self-testing in home and clinic settings in a resource-poor community.
Women aged 14-25 were randomised to receive a home kit with a pre-paid addressed envelope for mailing specimens or a clinic appointment, in Gugulethu, South Africa. Self-collected vaginal swabs were tested for gonorrhoea, chlamydia and trichomoniasis using PCR and self-tested for trichomoniasis using a rapid dipstick test. All women were interviewed at enrollment on sociodemographic and sexual history, and at the 6-week follow-up on feasibility and acceptability.
626 women were enrolled in the study, with 313 in each group; 569 (91%) completed their 6-week follow-up visit. Forty-seven per cent of the women in the home group successfully mailed their packages, and 13% reported performing the rapid test and/or mailing the kit (partial responders), versus 42% of women in the clinic group who kept their appointment. Excluding partial responders, women in the home group were 1.3 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.5) times as likely to respond to the initiative as women in the clinic group. Among the 44% who were tested, 22% tested positive for chlamydia, 10% for trichomoniasis, and 8% for gonorrhoea.
Self-sampling and self-testing are feasible and acceptable options in low-income communities such as Gugulethu. As rapid diagnostic tests become available and laboratory infrastructure improves, these methodologies should be integrated into services, especially services aimed at young women.

Full-text

Available from: Taryn Young, Jun 05, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
80 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The recent approval in the United States of the first rapid home test to diagnose HIV raises questions about its potential use and impact. We reviewed the existing literature on the unassisted use of home tests involving self-collection and testing of biological samples by untrained users-including existing HIV self-testing studies-to shed some light on what can be expected from the availability of the HIV home test. The studies reviewed showed that most participants could properly perform home tests, obtain accurate results, and interpret them-yielding high correlations with laboratory and health-professional performed tests. Users often had trouble performing blood-based tests. Participants generally understood the need to confirm positive test results. Materials accompanying HIV home tests should emphasize symptoms of acute infection and the need for additional testing when recent infection is suspected. Different home-test-based screening modalities, personalized HIV-counseling resources and HIV home test impact evaluation methods should be studied.
    AIDS and Behavior 11/2013; 18(5). DOI:10.1007/s10461-013-0668-9 · 3.49 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Home-based sampling is a strategy to enhance uptake of sexually transmissible infection (STI) screening. This review aimed to compare the screening uptake levels of home-based self-sampling and clinic-based specimen collection for STIs (chlamydia (Chlamydia trachomatis), gonorrhoea (Neisseria gonorrhoeae) and trichomoniasis) in females aged 14–50 years. Acceptability and effect on specimen quality were determined. Methods: Sixteen electronic databases were searched from inception to September 2012. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the uptake levels of home-based self-sampling and clinic-based sampling for chlamydia, gonorrhoea and trichomoniasis in females aged 14–50 years were eligible for inclusion. The risk of bias in the trials was assessed. Risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes were meta-analysed. Results: Of 3065 papers, six studies with seven RCTs contributed to the final review. Compared with clinic-based methods, home-based screening increased uptake significantly (P = 0.001–0.05) in five trials and was substantiated in a meta-analysis (RR: 1.55; 95% confidence interval: 1.30–1.85; P = 0.00001) of two trials. In three trials, a significant preference for home-based testing (P = 0.001–0.05) was expressed. No significant difference was observed in specimen quality. Sampling was rated as easy by a significantly higher number of women (P = 0.01) in the clinic group in one trial. Conclusions: The review provides evidence that home-based testing results in greater uptake of STI screening in females (14–50 years) than clinic-based testing without compromising quality in the developed world. Home collection strategies should be added to clinic-based screening programs to enhance uptake.
    Sexual Health 10/2013; 10(6). DOI:10.1071/SH13029 · 1.58 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Genitourinary medicine (GUM) departments need to be resource efficient to manage the increasing numbers of patients seeking to access services. At the Edinburgh GUM department, we wished to develop a new No-Talk Testing (NTT) clinic for asymptomatic, low-risk patients attending for routine sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening. We undertook a questionnaire feasibility study to determine patient acceptability and ability to self-screen for this service. A total of 267 respondents completed questionnaires regarding acceptability of a future NTT service; 227 agreed to comparison of their self-screen with clinician risk-assessment. Overall, patient acceptability for a future NTT service was high, with an average of 7.8/10 awarded for opinion. Seventy-three percent of patients agreed they would consider utilizing such a service in the future. Sixty-one percent of respondents suggested at least one benefit to a future NTT service; principally, prospects for increased speed, efficiency, capacity and reduced waiting times. Comparing STI risk self-assessment with clinician assessment, discrepancies were identified for 37% of individuals. However, a majority (70%) of the discrepancies identified were due to a risk being noted in the self-screen alone, and missed from clinician notes. In summary, the study demonstrated NTT as acceptable and feasible. Based on these results, we have now successfully introduced such a service within our department.
    International Journal of STD & AIDS 05/2013; 24(5):341-4. DOI:10.1177/0956462412472835 · 1.04 Impact Factor