Comparison of methods to increase repeat testing in persons treated for gonorrhea and/or chlamydia at public sexually transmitted disease clinics

• Published in: Sexually transmitted diseases Vol. 31; no. 11; p. 637
• Main Authors: Malotte, C Kevin, Ledsky, Rebecca, Hogben, Matthew, Larro, Michelle, Middlestadt, Susan, St Lawrence, Janet S, Olthoff, Glen, Settlage, Robert H, Van Devanter, Nancy L
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.11.2004
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Ambulatory Care Facilities; Chlamydia Infections - epidemiology; Chlamydia Infections - prevention & control; Female; Gonorrhea - epidemiology; Gonorrhea - etiology; Gonorrhea - prevention & control; Humans; Logistic Models; Los Angeles - epidemiology; Male; Maryland - epidemiology; Motivation; New York City - epidemiology; Patient Acceptance of Health Care; Postal Service; Reminder Systems; Telephone; Treatment Outcome; New York City; Maryland; Los Angeles
• ISSN: 0148-5717
• DOI: 10.1097/01.olq.0000143083.38684.9d

Retesting 3 to 4 months after treatment for those infected with chlamydia and/or gonorrhea has been recommended. We compared various methods of encouraging return for retesting 3 months after treatment for chlamydia or gonorrhea. In study 1, participants were randomly assigned to: 1) brief recommendation to return, 2) intervention 1 plus $20 incentive paid at return visit, or 3) intervention 1 plus motivational counseling at the first visit and a phone reminder at 3 months. In study 2, participants at 1 clinic were randomly assigned to 4) intervention 1, 5) intervention 1 plus phone reminder, or 6) intervention 1 plus motivational counseling but no telephone reminder. Using multiple logistic regression, the odds ratios for interventions 2 and 3, respectively, compared with intervention 1 were 1.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-2.5) and 2.6 (95% CI, 1.3-5.0). The odds ratios for interventions 5 and 6 compared with intervention 4 were 18.1 (95% CI, 1.7-193.5) and 4.6 (95% CI, 0.4-58.0). A monetary incentive did not increase return rates compared with a brief recommendation. A reminder phone call seemed to be the most effective method to increase return.