Erika G Martin, Arzana Myderrizi, Heeun Kim, Patrick Schumacher, Soyun Jeong, Thomas L Gift, Angela B Hutchinson, Kevin P Delaney, Harrell W Chesson
{"title":"Disease Intervention Specialist-Delivered Interventions and Other Partner Services for HIV and Sexually Transmitted Infections: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Erika G Martin, Arzana Myderrizi, Heeun Kim, Patrick Schumacher, Soyun Jeong, Thomas L Gift, Angela B Hutchinson, Kevin P Delaney, Harrell W Chesson","doi":"10.1016/j.amepre.2024.08.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Disease intervention specialists (DIS) are critical for delivering partner services programs that provide partner notification, counseling, referral, and other services for HIV, sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and other infections. This systematic review of partner services and other DIS-delivered interventions for HIV and STIs was conducted to summarize the effectiveness of these programs and identify evidence gaps.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature review was conducted with a narrative synthesis. Articles were located using keyword searches in MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL, and ProQuest through December 2022 and analyzed in 2023-2024. Included studies addressed an intervention of partner services or other DIS-delivered services for HIV or STIs; a United States setting; primary data collection; and an external comparison group or pre-post design.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1,915 unique records were screened for eligibility, with 30 studies included. Overall, DIS-delivered interventions improved clinical outcomes among index patients and population outcomes. Many studies focused on program process measures rather than population-level epidemiologic outcomes. All but one studies were scored as having low or medium strength of evidence.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The evidence could be strengthened by establishing a streamlined set of core metrics, assessing impact using rigorous causal inference methodologies, linking program and clinical data systems, and supplementing impact evaluations with evidence on implementation strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":50805,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Preventive Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Preventive Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2024.08.004","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Disease intervention specialists (DIS) are critical for delivering partner services programs that provide partner notification, counseling, referral, and other services for HIV, sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and other infections. This systematic review of partner services and other DIS-delivered interventions for HIV and STIs was conducted to summarize the effectiveness of these programs and identify evidence gaps.
Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted with a narrative synthesis. Articles were located using keyword searches in MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL, and ProQuest through December 2022 and analyzed in 2023-2024. Included studies addressed an intervention of partner services or other DIS-delivered services for HIV or STIs; a United States setting; primary data collection; and an external comparison group or pre-post design.
Results: A total of 1,915 unique records were screened for eligibility, with 30 studies included. Overall, DIS-delivered interventions improved clinical outcomes among index patients and population outcomes. Many studies focused on program process measures rather than population-level epidemiologic outcomes. All but one studies were scored as having low or medium strength of evidence.
Conclusions: The evidence could be strengthened by establishing a streamlined set of core metrics, assessing impact using rigorous causal inference methodologies, linking program and clinical data systems, and supplementing impact evaluations with evidence on implementation strategies.
期刊介绍:
The American Journal of Preventive Medicine is the official journal of the American College of Preventive Medicine and the Association for Prevention Teaching and Research. It publishes articles in the areas of prevention research, teaching, practice and policy. Original research is published on interventions aimed at the prevention of chronic and acute disease and the promotion of individual and community health.
Of particular emphasis are papers that address the primary and secondary prevention of important clinical, behavioral and public health issues such as injury and violence, infectious disease, women''s health, smoking, sedentary behaviors and physical activity, nutrition, diabetes, obesity, and substance use disorders. Papers also address educational initiatives aimed at improving the ability of health professionals to provide effective clinical prevention and public health services. Papers on health services research pertinent to prevention and public health are also published. The journal also publishes official policy statements from the two co-sponsoring organizations, review articles, media reviews, and editorials. Finally, the journal periodically publishes supplements and special theme issues devoted to areas of current interest to the prevention community.