Is Accelerated Partner Therapy (APT) a cost-effective alternative to routine patient referral partner notification in the UK? Preliminary cost-consequence analysis of an exploratory trial

Sexually Transmitted Infections

Volumn 88, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 16-20

  Roberts, Tracy E ^a   Tsourapas, Angelos ^a   Sutcliffe, Lorna ^b   Cassell, Jackie ^c   Estcourt, Claudia ^b,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c BRIGHTON AND SUSSEX MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^d BARTS HEALTH NHS TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIBIOTIC AGENT; AZITHROMYCIN; CEFIXIME;

ACCELERATED PARTNER THERAPY; ANTIBIOTIC THERAPY; ARTICLE; CHLAMYDIASIS; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CONSULTATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DRUG COST; GONORRHEA; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; MEDICAL EXAMINATION; MULTICENTER STUDY; NONSPECIFIC URETHRITIS; OUTPATIENT DEPARTMENT; PARENTAL NOTIFICATION; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT REFERRAL; PATIENT REFERRAL PARTNER NOTIFICATION; PHARMACY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SEXUAL COUNSELING; SEXUALITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED KINGDOM;

AMBULATORY CARE; CHLAMYDIA INFECTIONS; COMMUNITY PHARMACY SERVICES; CONTACT TRACING; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; GONORRHEA; GREAT BRITAIN; HOTLINES; HUMANS; MALE; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION; SEXUAL PARTNERS; SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES; URETHRITIS; VENEREOLOGY;

EID: 84855866566     PISSN: 13684973     EISSN: 14682044     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/sextrans-2011-050176     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Roberts TE, Robinson S, Barton PM, et al. Cost effectiveness of home based population screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in the UK: economic evaluation of chlamydia screening studies (ClaSS) project. BMJ 2007;335:291-4A.
2. WHO/UNAIDS. Sexually Transmitted Diseases: Policies and Principles for Prevention and Care. 1-47. Geneva: UNAIDS Best Practice Collection, 1999.
3. Trelle S, Shang AJ, Nartey L, et al. Improved effectiveness of partner notification for patients with sexually transmitted infections: systematic review. BMJ 2007;334:354-7. (Pubitemid 46328047)
4. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. One to One Interventions to Reduce the Transmission of Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) Including HIV, and to Reduce the Rate of Under 18 Conceptions, Especially Among Vulnerable and at Risk Groups. London: NICE, 2007.
5. Golden MR, Whittington WL, Handsfield HH, et al. Effect of expedited treatment of sex partners on recurrent or persistent gonorrhea or chlamydial infection. N Engl J Med 2005;352:676-85. (Pubitemid 40239215)
6. Roberts TE, Robinson S, Barton P, et al Chlamydia Screening Studies (ClaSS) Group. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis: a systematic review of the economic evaluations and modelling. Sex Transm Infect 2006;82:193-200; discussion 201.
7. Estcourt C, Sutcliffe L, Cassell J, et al. Can we improve partner notification rates through expedited partner therapy in the UK? Findings from an exploratory trial of Accelerated Partner Therapy (APT). Sex Transm Infect 2012;88:21-6.
8. Curtis L. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care. Canterbury, UK. Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent, 2008.
9. Low N, McCarthy A, Macleod J, et al Chlamydia Screening Studies Project Group. Epidemiological, social, diagnostic and economic evaluation of population screening for genital chlamydia infection. Health Technol Assess 2007;11:iii-iv, ix-xii, 1-165.
10. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, et al. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. ISBN 019-853945-7.