Closing the Equity Gap: An Intervention to Improve Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Testing for Adolescents and Young Adults in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhea are the most reported sexually transmitted infections in the United States. Testing rates remain suboptimal and may be subject to implicit bias. We evaluated the effectiveness of an opt-out chlamydia and gonorrhea testing program for adolescents and young adults in improving testing rates and promoting equity. METHODS: An opt-out testing program that standardized testing to once annually for 14 to 24-year-old patients was implemented across 28 federally qualified health centers spanning 4 specialties. A quasi-experimental design using interrupted time series analyses evaluated testing and infection rates between baseline, intervention, and pandemic-associated test shortage periods. Reduction in testing inequities based on sex, race, ethnicity, insurance, and language preference were also examined. RESULTS: A total of 57 452 encounters during the baseline, 17 320 during the intervention, and 26 993 during the test supply shortage periods were included. Testing increased from 66.8% to 81.0% (14.2% absolute increase) between baseline and intervention periods. Pediatric clinics demonstrated the largest improvement compared to other settings (absolute increase 30.9%). We found significant reductions in testing inequities for language preference (P < .001), and un-insured and public insured individuals (P < .001). More cases of chlamydia and gonorrhea were detected in the intervention period (chlamydia-29.7; gonorrhea-7.4 per 1000 patients) than in the baseline period (chlamydia-20.7; gonorrhea-4.4 per 1000 patients; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: An opt-out approach increased testing, reduced inequities between some groups and detected more infections than a risk-based approach. Opt-out testing should be considered as an approach to increase detection of chlamydia and gonorrhea and promote equity.

An Intervention to Improve Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Testing Among Adolescents in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Rates of chlamydia and gonorrhea among adolescents continue to rise. We aimed to evaluate if a universal testing program for chlamydia and gonorrhea improved testing rates in an urban general pediatric clinic and an urban family medicine clinic within a system of federally qualified health care centers and evaluated the feasibility, cost, and logistic challenges of expanding implementation across 28 primary care clinics within a federally qualified health care centers system. METHODS: A universal testing quality improvement program for male and female patient 14 to 18 years old was implemented in a general pediatrics and family medicine clinic in Denver, Colorado. The intervention was evaluated by using a controlled pre-post quasi-experimental design. The difference in testing rates due to the intervention was assessed by using a difference-in-differences regression model weighted with the inverse probability of treatment. RESULTS: In total, 15 541 pediatric encounters and 5420 family medicine encounters were included in the analyses. In pediatrics, the unadjusted testing rates increased from 32.0% to 66.7% in the intervention group and from 20.9% to 28.9% in the comparison group. For family medicine, the rates increased from 38.5% to 49.9% in the intervention group and decreased from 26.3% to 24.8% in the comparison group. The intervention resulted in an adjusted increase in screening rates of 25.2% (P < .01) in pediatrics and 11.8% (P < .01) in family medicine. The intervention was well received and cost neutral to the clinic. CONCLUSIONS: Universal testing for chlamydia and gonorrhea in primary care pediatrics and family medicine is a feasible approach to improving testing rates .

Gonorrhea and Chlamydia Rates Among 12- to 24-Year-Old Patients in an Urban Health System.

BACKGROUND: Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (GC) infection rates continue to rise. Screening guidelines have largely focused on sexually active female individuals and men who have sex with men populations. Health care system testing and infection rates, particularly among heterosexual male individuals, are poorly understood. Our aim was to evaluate CT and GC testing and prevalence among 12- to 24-year-old patients in an urban federally qualified health center system. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed electronic health record data from 2017 to 2019 in a large system of federally qualified health centers in Denver, CO. Abstracted data included demographics, sexual activity, sexual orientation, and laboratory results. χ2 Tests were used to evaluate differences between groups. RESULTS: Of the 44,021 patients included, 37.6% were tested, 15.0% were positive for CT, and 3.4% were positive for GC. Heterosexual male patients had a testing rate of 22.8% and positivity rates of CT and GC at 13.1% and 3.0%, respectively. Among tested patients documented as not sexually active, 7.5% were positive for CT. Multiple or reinfections were detected in 29% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows low testing rates and high rates of CT and GC infections among all patients, including heterosexual male patients and those documented as not sexually active. Improved screening of these populations in the primary care setting may be key to combating the sexually transmitted disease epidemic.

The impact of tailored diabetes registry report cards on measures of disease control: a nested randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Most studies of diabetes self-management that show improved clinical outcome performance involve multiple, time-intensive educational sessions in a group format. Most provider performance feedback interventions do not improve intermediate outcomes, yet lack targeted, patient-level feedback. METHODS: 5,457 low-income adults with diabetes at eight federally-qualified community health centers participated in this nested randomized trial. Half of the patients received report card mailings quarterly; patients at 4 of 8 clinics received report cards at every clinic visit; and providers at 4 of 8 clinics received quarterly performance feedback with targeted patient-level data. Expert-recommended glycemic, lipid, and blood pressure outcomes were assessed. Assessment of report card utility and patient and provider satisfaction was conducted through mailed patient surveys and mid- and post-intervention provider interviews. RESULTS: Many providers and the majority of patients perceived the patient report card as being an effective tool. However, patient report card mailings did not improve process outcomes, nor did point-of-care distribution improve intermediate outcomes. Clinics with patient-level provider performance feedback achieved a greater absolute increase in the percentage of patients at target for glycemic control compared to control clinics (6.4% vs 3.8% respectively, Generalized estimating equations Standard Error 0.014, p < 0.001, CI -0.131 - -0.077). Provider reaction to performance feedback was mixed, with some citing frustration with the lack of both time and ancillary resources. CONCLUSIONS: Patient performance report cards were generally well received by patients and providers, but were not associated with improved outcomes. Targeted, patient-level feedback to providers improved glycemic performance. Provider frustration highlights the need to supplement provider outreach efforts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00827710.