Among adult women, CA FP setting has relatively low CT rate - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Among adult women, CA FP setting has relatively low CT rate PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 260f7-NjQxN



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Among adult women, CA FP setting has relatively low CT rate

Description:

Among adult women, CA FP setting has relatively low CT rates but high ... Older ... targeted screening is appropriate for the population of women 21-25 ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:38
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 43
Provided by: cicat
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Among adult women, CA FP setting has relatively low CT rate


1
Developing CT Screening Guidelines for Women gt25
The Over 20 Study The Over 25 Evaluation
Region II IPP Meeting NYC, NY May 17, 2007
2
  • An evaluation of the performance/appropriateness
    of national chlamydia (CT) screening guidelines
    when applied to non-pregnant adult women seeking
    family planning services in California.

3
Background The Problem
  • Excessive CT screening in populations with low
    CT morbidity has implications
  • Not an effective use of limited resources
  • CA uses 3 as cost-effective cut-off
  • May lead to a higher proportion of false positive
    test results

4
Background The Problem (CA)
  • Among adult women, CA FP setting has relatively
    low CT rates but high volume of screening
  • Significantly less CT in women age gt25 than in
    younger women, yet screening rates are similar
  • Almost 50 of all screening occurs in this older
    age-group
  • CT prevalence in this population gt25 is lt3
  • CT rates for women age 21-25 lt3 in some areas

5
Background Why Not Stop Screening Older Women
Altogether?
  • Detecting/treating CT infections has been shown
    to reduce such adverse sequelae as PID,
    infertility
  • The vast majority of CT infections in all women,
    including women gt25, are asymptomatic or
    silent
  • Over 70 of CT in women gt25 do not present with
    clear clinical indications for testing
  • Screening is the only effective mechanism for
    detecting silent infections
  • No Screening Missing gt70 of CT in this
    population

6
Background The Solution Targeted Screening
TS!
  • Evidence-based targeted screening strategies
  • Can identify a sub-population with higher CT
  • A balance between saving resources and still
    reducing the burden of CT in lower-prevalence
    populations

7
Background Who to Target?
  • Clear guidelines needed to target CT screening in
    adult women
  • Though national recommendations support targeted
    screening for women gt25, they are
  • Not well-defined
  • Inconsistent, and/or
  • Inefficient

8
The Over 20 Study
9
The Over 20 Study Research Objectives
  • Among non-pregnant women age 21-30 seeking family
    planning services
  • Determine predictors of CT infection
  • Develop efficient targeted screening strategies
    for CT infection, specifically in women gt25
  • Determine whether targeted screening is
    appropriate for the population of women 21-25

10
The Over 20 Study Study Methods
Study Design Cross-sectional
  • Patient Eligibility Criteria
  • Female clients seeking FP services
  • Age 21-30
  • Not pregnant
  • Sexually Active (self-report of vaginal sex in
    past 12 months)

11
The Over 20 Study Study Methods
  • Data collected methods
  • Self-administered patient questionnaires
  • Demographics, relationship status, sexual
    behavior, STD history
  • Clinician-completed clinical evaluations
  • Reason for visit, birth control, STD contact, STD
    history, symptoms, clinical signs diagnoses,
    presumptive CT/GC Rx
  • Laboratory databases
  • CT GC test results

12
The Over 20 Study Results Participating Agencies
Project Timeline
  • Participating Sites
  • 9 clinics (3 CA FP agencies) all performing
    universal screening
  • Timeline two phases
  • May 2003 to May 2004
  • August 2004 to November 2005

13
The Over 20 Study Results Final Study
Sample Study Forms Submitted for Unique,
Eligible, CT-Tested Clients and Successfully
Matched with Lab Result Data
Age 21-30 years
14
The Over 20 Study Total Sample Results
Demographics Age (Years)
CT Tested N 4,292
15
The Over 20 Study Total Sample Results
Demographics Race/Ethnicity
CT Tested N 4,292
16
Patients with Clinical Indications for CT Testing
excluded from screening analysis
  • Report of current contact (exposure) to an STD
  • CT-indicative clinical syndrome diagnosed on
    exam
  • Cervicitis endocervical discharge, cervical
    friability, or cervical inflammation
  • Pelvic inflammatory disease (PID)
    Adnexal/uterine tenderness or cervical motion
    tenderness
  • New STD (confirmed or presumptively treated)
    diagnosed in-office on day of visit
    (trichomoniasis presumptive HSV, GC, or genital
    warts syphilis, HIV)

17
The Over 20 Study Results (Age 21-30) CT
Prevalence Proportion of Cases by Clinical
Presentation Exclusion Criteria Applied to
Screening Analysis
Total CT-tested Participants N 4,292 nCT
180 4.2 CT
  • Patients with clinical
  • indications for CT testing
  • N 550 nCT 48
  • STD contacts
  • Cervicitis or PID
  • New STD dx
  • 8.7 CT
  • Patients screened for CT
  • N 3,742 nCT 132
  • No STD contact
  • No cervicitis or PID
  • No new STD dx
  • 3.5 CT

27 of CT Cases
73 of CT Cases
87 of Pop. Tested
13 of Pop. Tested
18
  • Patients screened for CT
  • N 3,742 nCT 132
  • No STD contact
  • No cervicitis or PID
  • No new STD dx (except GC)
  • 3.5 CT

Patients age 21-25 screened for CT N 2655
nCT 100 3.8 CT
Patients age 26-30 screened for CT N 1,087
nCT 32 2.9 CT
19
The Over 20 Study Summary of Univariate
Findings Women age 26-30 years
  • Risk factors predictive or protective for CT
    infection (statistically significantly)
  • Partners possible other partners (3 or 12 mos)
  • More than 1 or 2 partners (3 or 12 mos)
  • BV
  • Married
  • Stable relationship (married, engaged or living
    with partner)
  • New partner in past 3 mos (p-value 0.06)

Protective against CT infection in univariate
analysis Independently associated with CT in
multivariate analysis (p-value lt0.05)
20
The Over 20 Study Partner possible other
partners Actual Question Studied
  • Q At anytime within the past 12 months, did any
    of your male partners have sex (of any type) with
    someone else while they were still in a sexual
    relationship with you?
  • A ? Yes, definitely
  • ? Not sure, it is possible
  • ? No, it is very unlikely

Answers combined
Also asked about the past 3 months in a
separate question.
21
The Over 20 Study Screening Analysis Results
Performance of Selective Screening
Algorithms Age 26-30
22
The Over 20 Study Screening Analysis Results
Performance of Selective Screening
Algorithms Age 26-30
Approximate replication
23
The Over 20 Study Key Study Limitations
  • Convenience sample of clinics mostly located on
    Californias central coast and in the central
    valley -- may not be representative of overall CA
    FP population
  • Unknown if results applicable to women gt 30

24
  • The Over 25 Evaluation
  • IPP Scantron Data
  • Chart Abstraction

25
The Over 25 Evaluation IPP Scantron
Data Benefits Strengths
  • Can use existing IPP data collected via Scantron
    forms (3,000) from CA Project Area and Los
    Angeles CT prevalence monitoring sites
  • Scantron forms newly revised 7/06 with influence
    from Over 20 Study result similar data
  • CPA and LA Scantron forms now identical
  • 20 geographically diverse clinic sites across
    CA
  • Data collected from CT-tested patients of all ages

26
The Over 25 Evaluation IPP Scantron Data
Challenges Limitations
  • Needed some supplemental data not available on
    forms (e.g., BV status)
  • Forms had never been validated
  • Clinic sites already targeting CT screening in
    women gt age 25 -- data bias
  • May give inflated prevalence rates
  • May underestimate associations between risk
    factors and CT
  • of population screened in algorithms may not be
    accurate

27
The Over 25 Evaluation Chart Abstraction Design/M
ethods
  • Design Case-Control Chart Abstraction
  • Use Scantron forms to pull sample of medical
    record charts for abstraction
  • All CT-positive patients (100)
  • A random-sample of CT-negative patients, chosen
    by clinic site, using a 4 negatives1 positive
    ratio (400)
  • Collect supplemental data for research purposes
  • Collect identical data, as possible, for
    validation purposes

28
The Over 25 Evaluation IPP Scantron
Data Validation Results
  • Successfully abstracted 82 of sample goal
    (446/544 charts in total 83/100 CT charts)
  • 8 pregnant
  • 1.5 males
  • Other issues wrong DOBs out of eligible age
    range clients not tested for CT missing charts
  • Data concordance
  • Demographics/other core variables gt 90
  • Lab data gt 95
  • CT symptoms 96 of Nos / 33 of
    Yess
  • Clinical data 96 of Nos / 38
    of Yess
  • Behavioral data 60-97 of Nos / 38-60 of
    Yess

29
Summary of Study Differences
Over 20 Study
Over 25 Evaluation
30
CA Chlamydia Rates by County, 2005
Over 20 Over 25 Site Distributions
7/2006 Provisional Data - CA DHS STD Control
Branch
31
The Over 25 Evaluation Total Weighted Chart
Abstraction Sample Results Total Sample Age
(Years)
CT Tested N 2,634
32
Results Total Samples Race/Ethnicity
CT Positives
CT Tested
Over 20 Study
N 4,292
n 180
Over 25 Evaluation Weighted sample
N 2,616
n 83
33
The Over 25 Evaluation Results (Age 26-44) CT
Prevalence Proportion of Cases by Clinical
Presentation Exclusion Criteria Applied to
Screening Analysis
Total CT-tested Participants N 2,634 nCT
83 3.2 CT
  • Patients with clinical
  • indications for CT testing
  • N 346 nCT 24
  • STD contacts
  • Cervicitis or PID
  • New STD dx
  • 6.9 CT
  • Patients screened for CT
  • N 2,287 nCT 59
  • No STD contact
  • No cervicitis or PID
  • No new STD dx
  • 2.6 CT

29 of CT Cases
71 of CT Cases
87 of Pop. Tested
13 of Pop. Tested
34
  • Patients screened for CT
  • Age 26-44
  • N 2,287 nCT 59
  • No STD contact
  • No cervicitis or PID
  • No new STD dx (except GC)
  • 2.6 CT

Patients age 26-30 screened for CT N 1,162
nCT 41 3.5 CT
Patients age 31-44 screened for CT N 1,126
nCT 18 1.6 CT
35
The Over 25 Evaluation Summary of
Univariate/Multivariate Findings Women age Over
25 (26-44)
  • Risk factors predictive for CT infection
    (statistically significantly)
  • Age lt 30 (26-30)
  • Partners possible other partners (no time frame)
  • New partner (2 mos)
  • Vaginal DC on exam unknown etiology (not
    cervicitis, trich, BV, or yeast)
  • More than 1 partner (12m) (p-value 0.13)
  • Complaints of pain or bleeding with sex, pelvic
    pain, or spotting (p-value 0.18)
  • Asian race (p-value 0.18)

Independently associated with CT in
multivariate analysis (p-value lt0.05)
36
The Over 25 Evaluation Summary of
Univariate/Multivariate Findings Women age Over
30 (31-44)
  • Risk factors predictive for CT infection
  • Age lt 35 (31-35)
  • (p-value 0.12)
  • Partners possible other partners (no timeframe)
  • (p-value 0.26)

37
Summary of Cross-Study Statistical Findings
Risk factors predictive of CT infection
Over 25 Eval Age 26-44
Over 20 Study Age 26-30
Predictive Risk Factor
38
The Over 20 Study Screening Analysis Results
Performance of Selective Screening Algorithms Age
gt 25 (26-30)
Actual number of cases and screened population
varies by algorithm due to missing values
Approximate replication
39
The Over 25 Evaluation Weighted Screening
Analysis Results Performance of Selective
Screening Algorithms Age gt 25 (26-44)
Actual number of cases and screened population
varies by algorithm due to missing values
Abstracted random sample weighted-up to full
tested population by site Approximate
replication
40
Implications for Screening Recommendations for
Non-Pregnant Women gt Age 25
  • Partner(s) possibly having had other concurrent
    partners (during past 12 mos) was the strongest
    predictor of CT in these research projects
  • Other fairly consistent behavioral predictors of
    CT included
  • gt 1 partners in past 12 mos
  • New partner in past 2-3 mos
  • Younger age, specifically age 26-30, was a strong
    demographic predictor of CT
  • Possible clinical predictors include BV and
    Vaginal DC on exam with no known etiology

41
Proposed CT Testing Screening Recommendations
for Non-Pregnant Women gt Age 25
  • Testing based on clear clinical indications
  • Current contact (exposure) to any STD
  • Clinical signs of cervicitis or PID
  • Newly confirmed or presumptively treated other
    STD dx
  • ? Additional discussion about other clinical
    considerations for clinician discretion
  • Vaginal DC on exam with unknown etiology
    (cervicitis?)
  • BV dx in some populations
  • Retesting Encourage CT clients RTC in 3 mos
  • Targeted Screening based on risk factors
  • Partner possible other partners during past 12
    mos!!!
  • More than 1 partner during past 12 mos (more than
    2 partners)
  • New partner during past 2-3 mos
  • Additional discussion higher CT risk often
    associated with younger age emphasis on
    prioritizing age 26-30

42
Acknowledgements
Thank you!
  • CADHS-STD
  • Joan Chow, Heidi Bauer, Erika Samoff, Gail Bolan
  • CFHC
  • Melanie Deal, Christy Ngo, Jackie Provost,
    Rebecca Braun, Lani Pasion
  • Lab Partners
  • Quest Diagnostics, Medical Group Pathology
    Laboratory,
  • UCSF Chlamydia Research Laboratory (Julius
    Schachter),
  • Planned Parenthood Mar Monte Laboratory (Jill A.
    MacAfee)
  • And all The Over 20 Over 25 Participating
    Clinic Sites
  • For further information, please contact
  • Holly Howard at hhoward_at_dhs.ca.gov
About PowerShow.com