Examining the acceptability of offering STI screening in higher educational settings

Uptake of screening for STIs, such as chlamydia and gonorrhoea, is often inadequate in young people despite provision of open-access sexual health services. Offering STI tests outside medical settings is currently being explored as a way to increase uptake in this group.

In 2017, St George’s University of London ran the ‘Test n Treat’ feasibility trial where free, confidential on-site testing for chlamydia and gonorrhoea was offered to students at six higher-education colleges in South London. We have previously reported on the main results of the trial and the cost estimates of providing such a service .

As part of the trial, the research team wanted to understand the acceptability of this type of service among students as well as the barriers and facilitators to its use. They interviewed a small sample of students, some of whom used the service and some of whom did not, as well teachers and the research team. The results of this qualitative study, which Aquarius Population Health gave advisory support to, were published in August 2020.

The paper reports that students who used the service had a very positive opinion of it. There were a number of barriers to using the service identified, including embarrassment about STI testing and the perceived view that individuals would be viewed negatively by their peers if they had an STI test. On the flip side, peers also acted as facilitators to uptake, for example, if a group of friends encouraged each other to get tested. A lack of understanding of STIs was another major barrier, with many students lacking understanding about the long-term consequences of STIs or having the misconception that only people with symptoms should get tested.  Where a £5 honorarium was given to students using the service, this acted as a legitimate incentive for testing, mitigating the (perceived) social stigma of testing.

The paper concludes that if a similar service were provided in future, uptake could be improved if education about sexual health was offered alongside testing, if small cash incentives were given and if peer influencers were engaged to promote the service.

Fleming, C., Drennan, V.M., Kerry-Barnard, S. et al. Understanding the acceptability, barriers and facilitators for chlamydia and gonorrhoea screening in technical colleges: qualitative process evaluation of the “Test n Treat” trial. BMC Public Health 20, 1212 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09285-1

Cost analysis of near patient chlamydia and gonorrhoea screening and treatment in further education/technical colleges

Aquarius collaborated with St George’s University of London on an NIHR-funded study, ‘Test n Treat’ (TnT). In this cluster randomised feasibility trial, rapid chlamydia (CT) and gonorrhoea (NG) testing and same day on-site chlamydia treatment in six technical colleges in South London was delivered. 

Using process data from the trial (the main results of which were published last year) and NHS cost data, the overall cost of providing the TnT service was calculated, as well as the cost per CT/NG screen and the cost per CT/NG infection diagnosed. These took into account the fixed daily costs, such as staff time and equipment use, and the per screen costs, i.e. the consumables used to collect and test samples, and were dependent on uptake of screening. Since the average cost per screen was higher if uptake was low as per what was observed in the trial, and lower if uptake was high, costs for a range of update scenarios were assessed. If daily capacity for screening was achieved (calculated as 49 screens/day), the cost per screen was £47 (including the £10 incentive given to students to encourage participation). This increased to £91, if uptake was equivalent to the average uptake observed on the trial (19 screens/day). The paper concluded that delivering this type of service is more expensive per person than CT and NG screening in sexual health clinics but could be more comparable in areas of high CT/NG prevalence.

Publication

Kerry-Barnard S, Huntington, S, Fleming C, et al. Near patient chlamydia and gonorrhoea screening and treatment in further education/technical colleges: a cost analysis of the ‘Test n Treat’ feasibility trial. BMC Health Services Research. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-5062-5

Assessing the impact of point-of-care testing for influenza and respiratory syncytial virus in children admitted to hospital

We assessed the impact and economic benefits of using a point-of-care (POC) assay instead of standard laboratory testing to detect influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in children and infants admitted to hospital . This real-world evaluation was conducted in two subsequent ‘flu seasons at the Evelina Children’s Hospital in London. Results showed that following the introduction of the POC testing, children with influenza were more likely to receive oseltamivir treatment, the antiviral recommended for influenza. Although there was no statistically significant reduction in the average length of hospital admission or in the number of antibiotics prescribed, there was a reduction in laboratory costs and in reimbursement charges for hospital admissions suggesting that use of the POC assay resulted in fewer procedures and interventions performed during admissions.

Publication Vecino-Ortiz AI, Goldenberg SD, Douthwaite ST, et al. Impact of a multiplex PCR point-of-care test for influenza A/B and respiratory syncytial virus on an acute pediatric hospital ward. Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease,  Volume 91, Issue 4, August 2018, Pages 331-335. 

 

To request a copy of the published article, please email caroline.dombrowski@aquariusph.com.

 

Read Abstract

 

Evaluating the costs, benefits and cost-effectiveness of multi-pathogen point-of-care tests for sexually transmitted infections

Evaluating multi-bug point-of-care tests for sexually transmitted infections

We estimated costs, benefits and cost-effectiveness of three accurate 30-minute NAAT POCT strategies that detect different STI combinations, compared with standard care  (laboratory-based NAAT for Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG)).  We found the CT-NG-MG-TV POCT strategy was the cheapest using tariff costing. It offered the most benefits, which in turn may have wider public health impacts through rapid and accurate STI diagnosis and management. Different testing strategies may be more cost-effective in different SHCs and patient groups. Further evidence is needed to capture the diversity of STI prevalence and management of patients across clinical services to better inform economic analyses.

presentation_icon
Harding-Esch EM, Huntington SE, Burns RM, et al. Evaluating the costs, benefits and cost-effectiveness of multi-pathogen point-of-care tests for sexually transmitted infections STI & HIV World Congress. 9-12 July 2017. Rio de Janiero, Brazil.

 

Read Publication

 

Point of care testing: Disruptive innovation – is the NHS ready for it yet?

Point of Care Testing

Our Managing Director, Elisabeth Adams, spoke in November about the importance of exploring the health economics of point of care testing (POCT) at the Royal Society of Medicine Telemedicine and eHealth event in London. The video of her presentation is now online – view the full talk here.

Why is it important to explore the health economics of point of care testing (POCT)?

Evaluating the health economics of POCTs can help us better understand the cost, benefits and value of implementing these tests, compared to standard laboratory tests. We need to explore the acquisition costs of innovative technology like POCTs compared to standard tests, as well as the benefits generated for patients, service providers, clinicians and public health in general. Benefits can include faster results, better care, fewer complications, more efficient services and better use of resources, and knock-on benefits like reduced prevalence of disease. Those making purchasing decisions for new tests need evidence to prove the value of the tests.

Continue reading →

Estimating the true costs of splitting HIV antiretroviral drugs

Problem: A regional UK commissioning decision in 2010 mandated that when the component drugs of Combivir—a combination therapy for HIV—come off patent, doctors must prescribe the individual drugs instead. This was driven by a perception that the generic component drugs are cheaper in the immediate-term and so more efficient overall. As our pharmaceutical client’s HIV combination drug was soon to come off patent, they wanted to help commissioners understand the full healthcare costs of such a policy, to inform future decisions.

Approach: We worked with our client and clinicians in Nottingham University Hospital’s HIV clinic who had patient-level care data before and after the commissioning change. We planned the analysis and identified which costs would be used and which data were required.

Impact: Our work contributes to the evidence-base of the costs of prescribing patients a single dose therapy over multiple doses. It has changed people’s perceptions of the costs of treating long-term conditions with combination drugs, and helped commissioners to make policy decisions about mandating use of particular drugs whilst taking a holistic view of healthcare.

 

Testimonial

“Aquarius provided a professional yet personal level of support with our project. We found the statistical support invaluable, and felt that they went the extra mile to ensure the project went smoothly and on time.”

  • Dr Ruth Taylor, Consultant in Genitourinary Medicine, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust

 

Related publications

 publication_iconTaylor R, Carlin E, Sadique Z, Ahmed I, Adams EJ. The financial and service implications of splitting fixed-dose antiretroviral drugs – a case study. Accepted Mar 2014, Int J STD AIDS

 

Increased efficiency and improved treatment for stable HIV patients in England

Problem: There was no guidance in England on how frequently stable HIV patients should attend clinics for routine visits, how frequently they should receive their HIV drugs and whether or not it would be cost efficient for patients to collect their drugs from the hospital pharmacy (which incurs VAT) or receive them through a home delivery (with associated delivery cost).

Approach: We built a simple spreadsheet tool in Microsoft Excel to estimate which strategy was the most cost-efficient. Local data from St George’s hospital were obtained and analysed, and supplemented with nationally published data as inputs in the model. Results suggested that the most cost efficient way of delivering care was to see stable patients for routine visits every six months in clinic, and give them their drugs through home delivery every three months; this would also save the most drug wastage for example if patients needed to switch to a new drug regimen. Results suggested that this could save roughly £2000 per patient annually, and roughly £8 million if it were implemented across England to the 4000 HIV patients in 2012.

Impact: Results were given to the London HIV commissioners, published in a peer-reviewed journal, and the tool is available to healthcare professionals so that they can put in their local data to help them make better decisions about healthcare provision.

 

Testimonial

“It has been a pleasure to work with Dr Elisabeth Adams on our costing project for HIV home delivery of drugs. I have also worked with her on research related to the POPI study of chlamydia screening.

She has a very professional and thorough approach to her work, and is good at delivering to timelines. I can recommend her as a partner for future work.”

  • Dr Phillip Hay, Reader and Honorary Consultant, Sexual Health and HIV Medicine, St. George’s Hospital, London

 

Related publications

publication_iconAdams EJ, Ogden D, Ehrlich A, Hay P. Treatment for stable HIV patients in England: can we save costs and improve patient care? Journal of Health Services Research & Policy. Published online 29 Oct 2013, doi:10.1177/1355819613508176

Please contact us to request a version of the tool.