Primary care integration of sexual and reproductive health services for chlamydia testing across WHO-Europe: a systematic review
File(s)
Author(s)
Quezada Yamamoto, Harumi
Dubois, Elizabeth
Mastellos, Nikolaos
Rawaf, Salman
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
Objective To identify current uptake of chlamydia testing (UCT) as a sexual and reproductive health service (SRHS) integrated in primary care settings of the WHO European region, with the aim to shape policy and quality of care.
Design Systematic review for studies published from January 2001 to May 2018 in any European language.
Data sources OVID Medline, EMBASE, Maternal and Infant Care and Global Health.
Eligibility criteria Published studies, which involved women or men, adolescents or adults, reporting a UCT indicator in a primary care within a WHO European region country. Study designs considered were: randomised control trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental, observational (eg, cohort, case–control, cross-sectional) and mixed-methods studies as well as case reports.
Data extraction and synthesis Two independent reviewers screened the sources and validated the selection process. The BRIGGS Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies, the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool 2011 and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists were considered for quality and risk of bias assessment.
Results 24 studies were finally included, of which 15 were cross-sectional, 4 cohort, 2 RCTs, 2 case–control studies and 1 mixed-methods study. A majority of the evidence cites the UK model, followed by the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and Belgium only. Acceptability if offered test in primary healthcare (PHC) ranged from 55% to 81.4% in women and from 9.5% to 70.6% when both genders were reported together. Men may have a lower UCT compared with women. When both genders were reported together, the lowest acceptability was 9.5% in the Netherlands. Denmark presented the highest percentage of eligible people who tested in a PHC setting (87.3%).
Conclusions Different health systems may influence UCT in PHC. The regional use of a common testing rate indicator is suggested to homogenise reporting. There is very little evidence on integration of SRHS such as chlamydia testing in PHC and there are gaps between European countries.
Design Systematic review for studies published from January 2001 to May 2018 in any European language.
Data sources OVID Medline, EMBASE, Maternal and Infant Care and Global Health.
Eligibility criteria Published studies, which involved women or men, adolescents or adults, reporting a UCT indicator in a primary care within a WHO European region country. Study designs considered were: randomised control trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental, observational (eg, cohort, case–control, cross-sectional) and mixed-methods studies as well as case reports.
Data extraction and synthesis Two independent reviewers screened the sources and validated the selection process. The BRIGGS Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies, the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool 2011 and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists were considered for quality and risk of bias assessment.
Results 24 studies were finally included, of which 15 were cross-sectional, 4 cohort, 2 RCTs, 2 case–control studies and 1 mixed-methods study. A majority of the evidence cites the UK model, followed by the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and Belgium only. Acceptability if offered test in primary healthcare (PHC) ranged from 55% to 81.4% in women and from 9.5% to 70.6% when both genders were reported together. Men may have a lower UCT compared with women. When both genders were reported together, the lowest acceptability was 9.5% in the Netherlands. Denmark presented the highest percentage of eligible people who tested in a PHC setting (87.3%).
Conclusions Different health systems may influence UCT in PHC. The regional use of a common testing rate indicator is suggested to homogenise reporting. There is very little evidence on integration of SRHS such as chlamydia testing in PHC and there are gaps between European countries.
Date Issued
2019-10-01
Date Acceptance
2019-09-17
Citation
BMJ Open, 2019, 9 (10)
ISSN
2044-6055
Publisher
BMJ Journals
Journal / Book Title
BMJ Open
Volume
9
Issue
10
Copyright Statement
© 2019 Author(s) (or their
employer(s)). Re-use
permitted under CC BY-NC (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). No
commercial re-use. See rights
and permissions. Published by
BMJ.
employer(s)). Re-use
permitted under CC BY-NC (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). No
commercial re-use. See rights
and permissions. Published by
BMJ.
Subjects
Europe
chlamydia
primary care
sexual reproductive health
uptake
1103 Clinical Sciences
1117 Public Health and Health Services
1199 Other Medical and Health Sciences
Publication Status
Published
Article Number
e031644
Date Publish Online
2019-10-17