Ruth Simmons, Annabel A Powell, Samreen Ijaz, Sema Mandal, Justin Shute, Yasmin Mohammadi, Michael Lattimore, Kelsey McOwat, Hannah L Moore, Aisling O'Rourke, Monica Desai, John Macleod, Asra Asgharzadeh, Zoe Ward, Peter Vickerman, Ross J Harris, Graham R Foster, Kirsty Roberts, Matthew Hickman
{"title":"在英国初级医疗机构开展试点邮寄出生队列丙型肝炎病毒筛查。","authors":"Ruth Simmons, Annabel A Powell, Samreen Ijaz, Sema Mandal, Justin Shute, Yasmin Mohammadi, Michael Lattimore, Kelsey McOwat, Hannah L Moore, Aisling O'Rourke, Monica Desai, John Macleod, Asra Asgharzadeh, Zoe Ward, Peter Vickerman, Ross J Harris, Graham R Foster, Kirsty Roberts, Matthew Hickman","doi":"10.3399/BJGP.2024.0219","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Birth cohort screening has been implemented in some countries to identify the potentially 'missed population' of people with undiagnosed chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) who may not be found through targeted approaches.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To determine uptake of HCV antibody testing using an oral swab screening method, the overall yield, whether those testing positive had risk markers in their primary care record, and the cost per case detected.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>This was a pilot screening study set in general practices in the Southwest of England, Yorkshire and Humber, and South London.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Participants consenting were sent an oral swab kit in the post and saliva samples were tested for antibodies to HCV.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 16 436/98 396 (16.7%) patients consented and were sent an oral swab kit. Of these, 12 216 (12.4%) returned a kit, with 31 participants (yield 0.03%) testing positive for HCV antibodies. Of those positive, 14/35 (45%) had a risk marker for HCV on their primary care record. Two (yield 0.002%) were confirmed RNA positive and referred for treatment, both had HCV risk markers. The cost per case was £16 000 per HCV antibody detected and £247 997 per chronic HCV detected.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Wide-scale screening could be delivered and identify people infected with HCV, however, most of these individuals could have been detected through lower-cost targeted screening. The yield and cost per case found in patients were substantially worse than model estimates and targeted screening studies. Birth cohort screening should not be rolled out in primary care in England.</p>","PeriodicalId":55320,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of General Practice","volume":" ","pages":"e122-e128"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11789811/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pilot postal birth cohort hepatitis C virus screening in UK primary care: HepCAPP study.\",\"authors\":\"Ruth Simmons, Annabel A Powell, Samreen Ijaz, Sema Mandal, Justin Shute, Yasmin Mohammadi, Michael Lattimore, Kelsey McOwat, Hannah L Moore, Aisling O'Rourke, Monica Desai, John Macleod, Asra Asgharzadeh, Zoe Ward, Peter Vickerman, Ross J Harris, Graham R Foster, Kirsty Roberts, Matthew Hickman\",\"doi\":\"10.3399/BJGP.2024.0219\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Birth cohort screening has been implemented in some countries to identify the potentially 'missed population' of people with undiagnosed chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) who may not be found through targeted approaches.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To determine uptake of HCV antibody testing using an oral swab screening method, the overall yield, whether those testing positive had risk markers in their primary care record, and the cost per case detected.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>This was a pilot screening study set in general practices in the Southwest of England, Yorkshire and Humber, and South London.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Participants consenting were sent an oral swab kit in the post and saliva samples were tested for antibodies to HCV.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 16 436/98 396 (16.7%) patients consented and were sent an oral swab kit. Of these, 12 216 (12.4%) returned a kit, with 31 participants (yield 0.03%) testing positive for HCV antibodies. Of those positive, 14/35 (45%) had a risk marker for HCV on their primary care record. Two (yield 0.002%) were confirmed RNA positive and referred for treatment, both had HCV risk markers. The cost per case was £16 000 per HCV antibody detected and £247 997 per chronic HCV detected.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Wide-scale screening could be delivered and identify people infected with HCV, however, most of these individuals could have been detected through lower-cost targeted screening. The yield and cost per case found in patients were substantially worse than model estimates and targeted screening studies. Birth cohort screening should not be rolled out in primary care in England.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55320,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of General Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e122-e128\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11789811/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of General Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2024.0219\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Print\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2024.0219","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Pilot postal birth cohort hepatitis C virus screening in UK primary care: HepCAPP study.
Background: Birth cohort screening has been implemented in some countries to identify the potentially 'missed population' of people with undiagnosed chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) who may not be found through targeted approaches.
Aim: To determine uptake of HCV antibody testing using an oral swab screening method, the overall yield, whether those testing positive had risk markers in their primary care record, and the cost per case detected.
Design and setting: This was a pilot screening study set in general practices in the Southwest of England, Yorkshire and Humber, and South London.
Method: Participants consenting were sent an oral swab kit in the post and saliva samples were tested for antibodies to HCV.
Results: In total, 16 436/98 396 (16.7%) patients consented and were sent an oral swab kit. Of these, 12 216 (12.4%) returned a kit, with 31 participants (yield 0.03%) testing positive for HCV antibodies. Of those positive, 14/35 (45%) had a risk marker for HCV on their primary care record. Two (yield 0.002%) were confirmed RNA positive and referred for treatment, both had HCV risk markers. The cost per case was £16 000 per HCV antibody detected and £247 997 per chronic HCV detected.
Conclusion: Wide-scale screening could be delivered and identify people infected with HCV, however, most of these individuals could have been detected through lower-cost targeted screening. The yield and cost per case found in patients were substantially worse than model estimates and targeted screening studies. Birth cohort screening should not be rolled out in primary care in England.
期刊介绍:
The British Journal of General Practice is an international journal publishing research, editorials, debate and analysis, and clinical guidance for family practitioners and primary care researchers worldwide.
BJGP began in 1953 as the ‘College of General Practitioners’ Research Newsletter’, with the ‘Journal of the College of General Practitioners’ first appearing in 1960. Following the change in status of the College, the ‘Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners’ was launched in 1967. Three editors later, in 1990, the title was changed to the ‘British Journal of General Practice’. The journal is commonly referred to as the ''BJGP'', and is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners.