Current Data to Inform Point-of-Care Testing for Sexually Transmitted Infections in United States Healthcare Settings: A Narrative Review.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Beula E Otsyina, Zachary W Lorenz, Lea E Widdice, Haneefa T Saleem, Matthew M Hamill, Khalil G Ghanem, Golsa M Yazdy, Amanda Billiter, Stacey B Griner, Barbara Van Der Pol, Olusegun O Soge, Johan H Melendez, Anne Rompalo, Charlotte A Gaydos, Yukari C Manabe, Susan Tuddenham
{"title":"Current Data to Inform Point-of-Care Testing for Sexually Transmitted Infections in United States Healthcare Settings: A Narrative Review.","authors":"Beula E Otsyina, Zachary W Lorenz, Lea E Widdice, Haneefa T Saleem, Matthew M Hamill, Khalil G Ghanem, Golsa M Yazdy, Amanda Billiter, Stacey B Griner, Barbara Van Der Pol, Olusegun O Soge, Johan H Melendez, Anne Rompalo, Charlotte A Gaydos, Yukari C Manabe, Susan Tuddenham","doi":"10.1097/OLQ.0000000000002422","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Point-of-care testing (POCT) for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) holds promise to improve care across clinical settings in the United States (US). However, multiple barriers to widespread adoption remain, and universal use will not be appropriate. At a minimum, decision-makers require robust, real-world evidence that STI POCTs improve patient outcomes within specific clinical contexts for these tests to be reimbursed and adopted, and data among priority patient groups may help guide targeted utilization. To inform decisions in the US and identify gaps in the evidence base, we reviewed literature on impact of STI POCTs for gonorrhea (NG), chlamydia (CT), trichomoniasis and syphilis on clinical outcomes across emergency departments (EDs), STI/sexual health clinics, primary care and gynecology clinics, and urgent care centers. Because US outcome data are sparse in several settings, we included studies from other high-income regions (Europe, Australia and Canada) noting where findings may not generalize to US practice. Evidence was summarized for priority patient groups (including symptomatic individuals and STI contacts), stratified by sex. We found some evidence for improved outcomes, particularly for symptomatic women in the ED. However, most studies did not stratify results by priority population, and the majority examined ≥90-minute CT/NG tests which, especially outside the ED, returned results only after the visit. Additional research is needed on the impact of STI POCTs on clinical outcomes in priority populations (including ≤30-minute tests), on workflow strategies enabling actionable results before the end of the encounter, and to provide updated cost or cost-effectiveness analyses across US clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":21837,"journal":{"name":"Sexually transmitted diseases","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sexually transmitted diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/OLQ.0000000000002422","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Point-of-care testing (POCT) for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) holds promise to improve care across clinical settings in the United States (US). However, multiple barriers to widespread adoption remain, and universal use will not be appropriate. At a minimum, decision-makers require robust, real-world evidence that STI POCTs improve patient outcomes within specific clinical contexts for these tests to be reimbursed and adopted, and data among priority patient groups may help guide targeted utilization. To inform decisions in the US and identify gaps in the evidence base, we reviewed literature on impact of STI POCTs for gonorrhea (NG), chlamydia (CT), trichomoniasis and syphilis on clinical outcomes across emergency departments (EDs), STI/sexual health clinics, primary care and gynecology clinics, and urgent care centers. Because US outcome data are sparse in several settings, we included studies from other high-income regions (Europe, Australia and Canada) noting where findings may not generalize to US practice. Evidence was summarized for priority patient groups (including symptomatic individuals and STI contacts), stratified by sex. We found some evidence for improved outcomes, particularly for symptomatic women in the ED. However, most studies did not stratify results by priority population, and the majority examined ≥90-minute CT/NG tests which, especially outside the ED, returned results only after the visit. Additional research is needed on the impact of STI POCTs on clinical outcomes in priority populations (including ≤30-minute tests), on workflow strategies enabling actionable results before the end of the encounter, and to provide updated cost or cost-effectiveness analyses across US clinical settings.

目前的数据,以告知点护理测试的性传播感染在美国医疗机构:叙述性回顾。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Sexually transmitted diseases
Sexually transmitted diseases 医学-传染病学
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
16.10%
发文量
289
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: ​Sexually Transmitted Diseases, the official journal of the American Sexually Transmitted Diseases Association​, publishes peer-reviewed, original articles on clinical, laboratory, immunologic, epidemiologic, behavioral, public health, and historical topics pertaining to sexually transmitted diseases and related fields. Reports from the CDC and NIH provide up-to-the-minute information. A highly respected editorial board is composed of prominent scientists who are leaders in this rapidly changing field. Included in each issue are studies and developments from around the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书