Accelerated partner therapy contact tracing for people with chlamydia (LUSTRUM): a crossover cluster-randomised controlled trial.

Claudia S Estcourt, Oliver Stirrup, Andrew Copas, Nicola Low, Fiona Mapp, John Saunders, Catherine H Mercer, Paul Flowers, Tracy Roberts, Alison R Howarth, Melvina Woode Owusu, Merle Symonds, Rak Nandwani, Chidubem Ogwulu, Susannah Brice, Anne M Johnson, Christian L Althaus, Eleanor Williams, Alex Comer-Schwartz, Anna Tostevin, Jackie A Cassell
{"title":"Accelerated partner therapy contact tracing for people with chlamydia (LUSTRUM): a crossover cluster-randomised controlled trial.","authors":"Claudia S Estcourt,&nbsp;Oliver Stirrup,&nbsp;Andrew Copas,&nbsp;Nicola Low,&nbsp;Fiona Mapp,&nbsp;John Saunders,&nbsp;Catherine H Mercer,&nbsp;Paul Flowers,&nbsp;Tracy Roberts,&nbsp;Alison R Howarth,&nbsp;Melvina Woode Owusu,&nbsp;Merle Symonds,&nbsp;Rak Nandwani,&nbsp;Chidubem Ogwulu,&nbsp;Susannah Brice,&nbsp;Anne M Johnson,&nbsp;Christian L Althaus,&nbsp;Eleanor Williams,&nbsp;Alex Comer-Schwartz,&nbsp;Anna Tostevin,&nbsp;Jackie A Cassell","doi":"10.1016/S2468-2667(22)00204-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Accelerated partner therapy has shown promise in improving contact tracing. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of accelerated partner therapy in addition to usual contact tracing compared with usual practice alone in heterosexual people with chlamydia, using a biological primary outcome measure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We did a crossover cluster-randomised controlled trial in 17 sexual health clinics (clusters) across England and Scotland. Participants were heterosexual people aged 16 years or older with a positive Chlamydia trachomatis test result, or a clinical diagnosis of conditions for which presumptive chlamydia treatment and contact tracing are initially provided, and their sexual partners. We allocated phase order for clinics through random permutation within strata. In the control phase, participants received usual care (health-care professional advised the index patient to tell their sexual partner[s] to attend clinic for sexually transmitted infection screening and treatment). In the intervention phase, participants received usual care plus an offer of accelerated partner therapy (health-care professional assessed sexual partner[s] by telephone, then sent or gave the index patient antibiotics and sexually transmitted infection self-sampling kits for their sexual partner[s]). Each phase lasted 6 months, with a 2-week washout at crossover. The primary outcome was the proportion of index patients with a positive C trachomatis test result at 12-24 weeks after contact tracing consultation. Secondary outcomes included proportions and types of sexual partners treated. Analysis was done by intention-to-treat, fitting random effects logistic regression models. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 15996256.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Between Oct 24, 2018, and Nov 17, 2019, 1536 patients were enrolled in the intervention phase and 1724 were enrolled in the control phase. All clinics completed both phases. In total, 4807 sexual partners were reported, of whom 1636 (34%) were steady established partners. Overall, 293 (19%) of 1536 index patients chose accelerated partner therapy for a total of 305 partners, of whom 248 (81%) accepted. 666 (43%) of 1536 index patients in the intervention phase and 800 (46%) of 1724 in the control phase were tested for C trachomatis at 12-24 weeks after contact tracing consultation; 31 (4·7%) in the intervention phase and 53 (6·6%) in the control phase had a positive C trachomatis test result (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·41 to 1·04]; p=0·071; marginal absolute difference -2·2% [95% CI -4·7 to 0·3]). Among index patients with treatment status recorded, 775 (88·0%) of 881 patients in the intervention phase and 760 (84·6%) of 898 in the control phase had at least one treated sexual partner at 2-4 weeks after contact tracing consultation (adjusted OR 1·27 [95% CI 0·96 to 1·68]; p=0·10; marginal absolute difference 2·7% [95% CI -0·5 to 6·0]). No clinically significant harms were reported.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Although the evidence that the intervention reduces repeat infection was not conclusive, the trial results suggest that accelerated partner therapy can be safely offered as a contact tracing option and is also likely to be cost saving. Future research should find ways to increase uptake of accelerated partner therapy and develop alternative interventions for one-off sexual partners.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>National Institute for Health Research.</p>","PeriodicalId":431786,"journal":{"name":"The Lancet. Public health","volume":" ","pages":"e853-e865"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Lancet. Public health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(22)00204-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: Accelerated partner therapy has shown promise in improving contact tracing. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of accelerated partner therapy in addition to usual contact tracing compared with usual practice alone in heterosexual people with chlamydia, using a biological primary outcome measure.

Methods: We did a crossover cluster-randomised controlled trial in 17 sexual health clinics (clusters) across England and Scotland. Participants were heterosexual people aged 16 years or older with a positive Chlamydia trachomatis test result, or a clinical diagnosis of conditions for which presumptive chlamydia treatment and contact tracing are initially provided, and their sexual partners. We allocated phase order for clinics through random permutation within strata. In the control phase, participants received usual care (health-care professional advised the index patient to tell their sexual partner[s] to attend clinic for sexually transmitted infection screening and treatment). In the intervention phase, participants received usual care plus an offer of accelerated partner therapy (health-care professional assessed sexual partner[s] by telephone, then sent or gave the index patient antibiotics and sexually transmitted infection self-sampling kits for their sexual partner[s]). Each phase lasted 6 months, with a 2-week washout at crossover. The primary outcome was the proportion of index patients with a positive C trachomatis test result at 12-24 weeks after contact tracing consultation. Secondary outcomes included proportions and types of sexual partners treated. Analysis was done by intention-to-treat, fitting random effects logistic regression models. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 15996256.

Findings: Between Oct 24, 2018, and Nov 17, 2019, 1536 patients were enrolled in the intervention phase and 1724 were enrolled in the control phase. All clinics completed both phases. In total, 4807 sexual partners were reported, of whom 1636 (34%) were steady established partners. Overall, 293 (19%) of 1536 index patients chose accelerated partner therapy for a total of 305 partners, of whom 248 (81%) accepted. 666 (43%) of 1536 index patients in the intervention phase and 800 (46%) of 1724 in the control phase were tested for C trachomatis at 12-24 weeks after contact tracing consultation; 31 (4·7%) in the intervention phase and 53 (6·6%) in the control phase had a positive C trachomatis test result (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·41 to 1·04]; p=0·071; marginal absolute difference -2·2% [95% CI -4·7 to 0·3]). Among index patients with treatment status recorded, 775 (88·0%) of 881 patients in the intervention phase and 760 (84·6%) of 898 in the control phase had at least one treated sexual partner at 2-4 weeks after contact tracing consultation (adjusted OR 1·27 [95% CI 0·96 to 1·68]; p=0·10; marginal absolute difference 2·7% [95% CI -0·5 to 6·0]). No clinically significant harms were reported.

Interpretation: Although the evidence that the intervention reduces repeat infection was not conclusive, the trial results suggest that accelerated partner therapy can be safely offered as a contact tracing option and is also likely to be cost saving. Future research should find ways to increase uptake of accelerated partner therapy and develop alternative interventions for one-off sexual partners.

Funding: National Institute for Health Research.

衣原体患者的加速伴侣治疗接触者追踪(LUSTRUM):一项交叉集群随机对照试验。
背景:加速伴侣治疗在改善接触者追踪方面显示出希望。我们的目的是利用生物学主要结局指标来评估异性恋衣原体患者在常规接触者追踪的基础上进行伴侣加速治疗的有效性。方法:我们在英格兰和苏格兰的17家性健康诊所(群)中进行了交叉群随机对照试验。参与者是16岁或以上的异性恋者,沙眼衣原体检测结果呈阳性,或临床诊断为最初提供了假定衣原体治疗和接触者追踪的疾病,以及他们的性伴侣。我们通过地层内的随机排列来分配诊所的相位顺序。在控制阶段,参与者接受常规护理(卫生保健专业人员建议指标患者告知其性伴侣到诊所进行性传播感染筛查和治疗)。在干预阶段,参与者接受常规护理和伴侣加速治疗(卫生保健专业人员通过电话对性伴侣进行评估,然后向指标患者发送或提供抗生素和性伴侣性传播感染自采样包)。每个阶段持续6个月,在交叉时有2周的洗脱期。主要结局是接触者追踪会诊后12-24周沙眼原体检测结果阳性的指数患者比例。次要结果包括接受治疗的性伴侣的比例和类型。通过意向治疗、拟合随机效应logistic回归模型进行分析。该试验在ISRCTN注册中心注册,15996256。研究结果:2018年10月24日至2019年11月17日期间,1536名患者入组干预期,1724名患者入组对照期。所有诊所都完成了这两个阶段。总共报告了4807个性伴侣,其中1636(34%)是稳定的建立伴侣。总体而言,1536例指标患者中293例(19%)选择了加速伴侣治疗,共305例伴侣,其中248例(81%)接受了加速伴侣治疗。在接触者追踪会诊后12-24周,干预期1536例指数患者中有666例(43%)和对照期1724例患者中有800例(46%)进行了沙眼原体检测;干预期31例(4.7%)沙眼原体检测阳性,对照组53例(6.6%)沙眼原体检测阳性(校正优势比[OR] 0.66 [95% CI 0.41 ~ 1.04];p = 0·071;边际绝对差-2·2% [95% CI -4·7至0.3])。在记录治疗状态的指数患者中,881名干预期患者中有775名(88.0%),898名对照期患者中有760名(84.6%),在接触者追踪咨询后2-4周内至少有一名接受治疗的性伴侣(调整OR为1.27 [95% CI为0.96 ~ 1.68];p = 0·10;边际绝对差2.7% [95% CI - 0.05 ~ 6.0])。没有临床显著危害的报道。解释:虽然干预减少重复感染的证据并不确凿,但试验结果表明,加速性伴侣治疗可以作为一种安全的接触者追踪选择,也可能节省成本。未来的研究应该找到增加加速伴侣治疗的方法,并为一次性伴侣开发替代干预措施。资助:国家卫生研究所。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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