Cost Comparisons between Home- and Clinic-Based Testing for Sexually Transmitted Diseases in High-Risk Young Women
Open Access
- 9 December 2007
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Hindawi Limited in Infectious Diseases in Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Vol. 2007, 1-5
- https://doi.org/10.1155/2007/62467
Abstract
Home testing for chlamydia and gonorrhea increases screening rates, but the cost consequences of this intervention are unclear. We examined the cost differences between home-based and clinic-based testing and the cost-effectiveness of home testing based on the DAISY study, a randomized controlled trial. Direct and indirect costs were estimated for home and clinic testing, and cost-effectiveness was calculated as cost per additional test performed. In the clinic testing group, direct costs were $49/test and indirect costs (the costs of seeking or receiving care) were $62/test. Home testing cost was $25/test. We found that home testing was cost saving when all testing for all patients was considered. However cost savings were not seen when only asymptomatic tests or when patient subgroups were considered. A home testing program could be cost saving, depending on whether changes in clinic testing frequency occur when home testing is available.Keywords
This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- Home screening for sexually transmitted diseases in high-risk young women: randomised controlled trialSexually Transmitted Infections, 2007
- The Cost Effectiveness of Gonorrhea Screening in Urban Emergency DepartmentsSexually Transmitted Diseases, 2005
- Screening for Gonorrhea: Recommendation StatementAnnals of Family Medicine, 2005
- Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in Women 15 to 29 Years of Age: A Cost-Effectiveness AnalysisAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2004
- Indirect Estimation of Chlamydia Screening Coverage Using Public Health Surveillance DataAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 2004
- Barriers to screening sexually active adolescent women for chlamydia: a survey of primary care physiciansPublished by Elsevier ,2001
- Home Sampling versus Conventional Swab Sampling for Screening ofChlamydia trachomatisin Women: A Cluster‐Randomized 1‐Year Follow‐up StudyClinical Infectious Diseases, 2000
- Efficacy of home sampling for screening of Chlamydia trachomatis: randomised studyBMJ, 1998
- Prevention of Pelvic Inflammatory Disease by Screening for Cervical Chlamydial InfectionNew England Journal of Medicine, 1996
- Five‐Hundred Life‐Saving Interventions and Their Cost‐EffectivenessRisk Analysis, 1995