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.

OBJECTIVES: To undertake a cost-consequence analysis to assess two new models of partner notification (PN), known as Accelerated Partner Therapy (APT Hotline and APT Pharmacy), as compared with routine patient referral PN, for sex partners of people with chlamydia, gonorrhoea and non-gonococcal urethritis. METHODS: Comparison of costs and outcomes alongside an exploratory trial involving two genitourinary medicine clinics and six community pharmacies. Index patients selected the PN method (APT Hotline, APT Pharmacy or routine PN) for their partners. Clinics and pharmacies recorded cost and resource use data including duration of consultation and uptake of treatment pack. Cost data were collected prospectively for two out of three interventions, and data were synthesised and compared in terms of effectiveness and costs. RESULTS: Routine PN had the lowest average cost per partner treated (approximately £46) compared with either APT Hotline (approximately £54) or APT Pharmacy (approximately £53) strategies. The cost-consequence analysis revealed that APT strategies were more costly but also more effective at treating partners compared to routine PN. CONCLUSION: The hotline strategy costs more than both the alternative PN strategies. If we accept that strategies which identify and treat partners the fastest are likely to be the most effective in reducing reinfection and onward transmission, then APT Hotline appears an effective PN strategy by treating the highest number of partners in the shortest duration. Whether the additional benefit is worth the additional cost cannot be determined in this preliminary analysis. These data will be useful for informing development of future randomised controlled trials of APT.

The impact of genital warts: loss of quality of life and cost of treatment in eight sexual health clinics in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the loss of quality of life and cost of treatment associated with genital warts seen in sexual health clinics. METHODS: A cross-sectional questionnaire study and case note review of individuals with genital warts, carried out in eight sexual health clinics in England and Northern Ireland. Individuals with genital warts attending the participating clinics were invited to take part in the questionnaire study. 895 participants were recruited. A separate sample of 370 participants who had attended a participating clinic with a first visit for a first or recurrent episode of genital warts between April and June 2007 was included in the case note review. Quality of life was measured using the EQ-5D questionnaire and the cost of an episode of care was derived from the case note review. RESULTS: The weighted mean EQ-5D index score was 0.87 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.89). The weighted mean disutility was 0.056 (95% CI 0.038 to 0.074). The estimated mean loss of quality-adjusted life-years associated with an episode of genital warts was 0.018 (95% CI 0.0079 to 0.031), equivalent to 6.6 days of healthy life lost per episode. The weighted mean cost per episode of care was £94 (95% CI £84 to £104), not including the cost of a sexually transmitted infection screen. CONCLUSIONS: Genital warts have a substantial impact on the health service and the individual. This information can be utilised for economic evaluation of human papillomavirus vaccination.

The impact of establishing a local-enhanced service for treating sexually transmitted infections in primary care.

OBJECTIVES: To consider whether a local-enhanced service in sexual health in City and Hackney, London, added to the services already provided within the borough and to compare the cost to the Primary Care Trust of diagnosing sexually transmitted infections (STI) in general practice and in the genitourinary medicine clinic. METHOD: An observational study describing the local-enhanced service in primary care, including a quantitative analysis of swabs taken for chlamydial and gonorrhoeal infections at different venues before and after the introduction of the local-enhanced service. RESULTS: 32 out of 51 general practices (63%) within City and Hackney joined the local-enhanced service. An upward trend in the proportion of chlamydial infection swabs taken in general practice compared with other venues predated the introduction of the local-enhanced service. Practices participating in the local-enhanced service accounted for over 99% of the STI diagnosed in primary care and for 8% of the cases of chlamydial infection diagnosed in the borough. The cost per STI diagnosed within the local-enhanced service was pound930. CONCLUSION: The local-enhanced service provided a supportive and incentivised framework for STI testing within primary care. An inequity in service provision within general practice predating the local-enhanced service continued at the same level after the introduction of the local-enhanced service.