An analysis of and intervention in the sexual transmission of disease

Behavior analytic contributions to public health and telehealth

The Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis is launching a special series on the topics of public health and telehealth. The special series begins with the articles in this issue and will continue for the next 2 to 3 issues with an open submission window until September 1, 2020. Behavior analysis has much to offer with respect to public health and much to gain from continued and expanded use of telehealth. This paper outlines the importance of these topics in the current crisis and in our ongoing evolution as a field. The historical literature in behavior analysis is reviewed for each topic along with suggestions for future research. The articles from the special series will be combined with historical contributions from JABA into a virtual issue. We encourage continued submissions on these topics even after the special series is completed as future papers will also be incorporated into the special issue.

Leveraging applied behavior analysis research and practice in the service of public health

Human behavior plays a central role in all domains of public health. Applied behavior analysis (ABA) research and practice can contribute to public health solutions that directly address human behavior. In this paper, we describe the field of public health, identify points of interaction between public health and ABA, summarize what ABA research has already contributed, and provide several recommendations for how ABA research and practice could continue to promote public health outcomes. A clearer focus on behavior and widespread adoption of research designs and interventions informed by the ABA literature could lead to better public health outcomes. Reciprocally, better integration of public health goals and strategies into ABA research, harnessing of technology, and more collaboration would help diversify and disseminate our applied science and could yield more effective and scalable interventions to prevent and treat public health problems.

Strategies for partner notification for sexually transmitted infections, including HIV

BACKGROUND

Partner notification (PN) is the process whereby sexual partners of an index patient are informed of their exposure to a sexually transmitted infection (STI) and the need to obtain treatment. For the person (index patient) with a curable STI, PN aims to eradicate infection and prevent re-infection. For sexual partners, PN aims to identify and treat undiagnosed STIs. At the level of sexual networks and populations, the aim of PN is to interrupt chains of STI transmission. For people with viral STI, PN aims to identify undiagnosed infections, which can facilitate access for their sexual partners to treatment and help prevent transmission.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different PN strategies in people with STI, including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched electronic databases (the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE) without language restrictions. We scanned reference lists of potential studies and previous reviews and contacted experts in the field. We searched three trial registries. We conducted the most recent search on 31 August 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing two or more PN strategies. Four main PN strategies were included: patient referral, expedited partner therapy, provider referral and contract referral. Patient referral means that the patient notifies their sexual partners, either with (enhanced patient referral) or without (simple patient referral) additional verbal or written support. In expedited partner therapy, the patient delivers medication or a prescription for medication to their partner(s) without the need for a medical examination of the partner. In provider referral, health service personnel notify the partners. In contract referral, the index patient is encouraged to notify partner, with the understanding that the partners will be contacted if they do not visit the health service by a certain date.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We analysed data according to paired partner referral strategies. We organised the comparisons first according to four main PN strategies (1. enhanced patient referral, 2. expedited partner therapy, 3. contract referral, 4. provider referral). We compared each main strategy with simple patient referral and then with each other, if trials were available. For continuous outcome measures, we calculated the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). For dichotomous variables, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI. We performed meta-analyses where appropriate. We performed a sensitivity analysis for the primary outcome re-infection rate of the index patient by excluding studies with attrition of greater than 20%. Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 26 trials (17,578 participants, 9015 women and 8563 men). Five trials were conducted in developing countries. Only two trials were conducted among HIV-positive patients. There was potential for selection bias, owing to the methods of allocation used and of performance bias, owing to the lack of blinding in most included studies. Seven trials had attrition of greater than 20%, increasing the risk of bias.The review found moderate-quality evidence that expedited partner therapy is better than simple patient referral for preventing re-infection of index patients when combining trials of STIs that caused urethritis or cervicitis (6 trials; RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.89, I(2) = 39%). When studies with attrition greater than 20% were excluded, the effect of expedited partner therapy was attenuated (2 trials; RR 0.8, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.04, I(2) = 0%). In trials restricted to index patients with chlamydia, the effect was attenuated (2 trials; RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.35, I(2) = 22%). Expedited partner therapy also increased the number of partners treated per index patient (three trials) when compared with simple patient referral in people with chlamydia or gonorrhoea (MD 0.43, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.58) or trichomonas (MD 0.51, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.67), and people with any STI syndrome (MD 0.5, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.67). Expedited partner therapy was not superior to enhanced patient referral in preventing re-infection (3 trials; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.53, I(2) = 33%, low-quality evidence). Home sampling kits for partners (four trials) did not result in lower rates of re-infection in the index case (measured in one trial), or higher numbers of partners elicited (three trials), notified (two trials) or treated (one trial) when compared with simple patient referral. There was no consistent evidence for the relative effects of provider, contract or other patient referral methods. In one trial among men with non-gonococcal urethritis, more partners were treated with provider referral than with simple patient referral (MD 0.5, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.63). In one study among people with syphilis, contract referral elicited treatment of more partners than provider referral (MD 2.2, 95% CI 1.95 to 2.45), but the number of partners receiving treatment was the same in both groups. Where measured, there was no statistical evidence of differences in the incidence of adverse effects between PN strategies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence assessed in this review does not identify a single optimal strategy for PN for any particular STI. When combining trials of STI causing urethritis or cervicitis, expedited partner therapy was more successful than simple patient referral for preventing re-infection of the index patient but was not superior to enhanced patient referral. Expedited partner therapy interventions should include all components that were part of the trial intervention package. There was insufficient evidence to determine the most effective components of an enhanced patient referral strategy. There are too few trials to allow consistent conclusions about the relative effects of provider, contract or other patient referral methods for different STIs. More high-quality RCTs of PN strategies for HIV and syphilis, using biological outcomes, are needed.

Partner notification

INTRODUCTION

Many people diagnosed with a sexually transmitted disease (STD) do not have symptoms, and may not inform their past or current sexual partners of their diagnosis or routinely use condoms. Several strategies have been used to notify and treat partners of people diagnosed with an STD, but only a limited number of RCTs of their effectiveness have been undertaken.

METHODS AND OUTCOMES

We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of partner notification strategies in people with different STDs? What are the effects of interventions to improve effectiveness of patient referral in people with STDs? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to August 2008 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

RESULTS

We found 17 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: contract referral; counselling (both alone and in combination with educational interventions) of index patients; educational interventions for the index patient; information for the index patient or partner; outreach assistance; patient referral; patient referral via different types of healthcare professional; patient-delivered partner therapy; patient-delivered home-sampling kits; provider referral; and reminders (any format) for the index patient.

Human immunodeficiency virus infection prevention: strategies for clinicians

The complexity of the epidemic of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection has made the creation of effective prevention programs an evolving and challenging task. Prevention of new HIV infections is an issue of increasing importance as the prevalence of HIV infection continues to increase. The integration of prevention and clinical care is recognized as a key element of future prevention activities. Prevention of HIV infection should extend beyond the traditional public health model to the clinical care site. The clinical care setting offers a unique opportunity to bring people with HIV disease into care and to establish relationships, thus creating a foundation for prevention-related activities. However, the expertise and energy that clinicians currently dedicate to diagnosis and treatment far exceeds that directed toward prevention. We review details about and the efficacies of specific prevention efforts of relevance in clinical practice, and we conclude with practical recommendations regarding the most simple and efficient ways of integrating both behavioral counseling and medical interventions as prevention tools into clinical practice.

Strategies for partner notification for sexually transmitted diseases

BACKGROUND

Partner notification has been practiced for decades, with substantial resources directed towards it, and with little evidence on whether it has made a public health impact on disease transmission. Most of the evaluations were not randomized controlled trials, and were conducted in the United States, prior to the HIV/AIDS epidemic. There are reasons to question whether partner notification for gonorrhoea and chlamydia is applicable to HIV. It is also questionable whether interventions for the developed world are applicable to the developing world.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to compare the effects of various sexually transmitted disease (STD) partner notification strategies, including to compare provider referral with contract and patient referral, and to compare different patient referral strategies to each other. In addition to updating previous reviews, it addresses partner notification in developing countries as well as in developed countries, with particular consideration for HIV/AIDS. It attempts to address some of the methodological limitations of earlier reviews.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The search strategy included MEDLINE, EMBASE, Psychological Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, the Cochrane Controlled Trials register, the proceedings of the International AIDS Conferences and the International Society for STD Research meetings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

The review includes published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing two or more partner notification strategies for people diagnosed with STDs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For each comparison within each study, the difference in the rate of partners elicited, notified, medically evaluated, harmed, etc, the 95% confidence interval, and if significant, the numbers needed to treat (NNT) were calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 11 RCTs, including 8014 participants. Only two trials were conducted in developing countries, and only two trials were conducted among HIV positive patients. There was some risk of bias in all the included trials. The review found moderately strong evidence that: 1. provider referral alone, or the choice between patient and provider referral, when compared with patient referral among patients with HIV or any STD, increases the rate of partners presenting for medical evaluation; 2. contract referral, when compared with patient referral among patients with gonorrhoea, results in more partners presenting for medical evaluation; 3. verbal, nurse-given health education together with patient-centred counselling by lay workers, when compared with standard care among patients with any STD, results in small increases in the rate of partners treated.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There is a need for evaluations of interventions combining provider training and patient education, and for evaluations conducted in developing countries. All partner notification evaluations, but especially those among HIV positive patients, need to measure potential harmful effects, such as domestic violence, to ensure that partner notification does more good than harm.

Partner notification in the United States: an evidence-based review

INTRODUCTION

To conduct an evidence-based review of the literature on the effectiveness of partner notification strategies for syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in the United States.

METHODS

Systematic literature searches of available databases yielded 212 English language articles on partner notification, 13 of which met the inclusion criteria. These 13 articles were systematically reviewed, abstracted, and rated for quality of study methods, analysis, and generalizability.

RESULTS

Partner notification can newly detect HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases among partners. Of the six high-quality studies, the highest numbers of infections per infected person, 0.23 and 0.24, were detected by provider referral while the lowest number of infections per infected person, 0.03, was detected by self referral. None of the 13 studies examined the consequences of partner notification, such as infections or health consequences averted or changes in behavior and partnerships for infected persons or their partners.

CONCLUSIONS

There is good evidence that partner notification is a means of newly detecting infections. In addition, there is fair evidence that provider referral generally ensures that more partners are notified and medically evaluated than does self referral. More research is needed to improve elicitation and notification procedures and tailor them to specific populations, to assess the effect of new testing technologies on partner notification, and to understand the consequences of partner notification for infected persons and their partners.

Three models to promote syphilis screening and treatment in a high risk population

Three syphilis control models targeted at a high incidence area were implemented and evaluated over a 31-month period. These models consisted of (1) street-based outreach and referral to community health clinics for free sexually transmitted disease screening and treatment, (2) off-site syphilis screening at high risk locations and referral for free treatment, and (3) off-site syphilis screening and referral at high risk locations with monetary incentives offered for obtaining test results and seeking treatment if required. Off-site screening--conducted at homeless shelters, soup kitchens, drug treatment centers, and community fairs--was found to be significantly more effective in promoting syphilis screening than outreach and referral to community health centers. For the off-site screening models, monetary incentives were related to an increase in the proportion of individuals at homeless shelters and soup kitchens who agreed to be tested, and to an increase in the proportion of people at homeless shelters, soup kitchens and drug treatment centers who sought their test results and obtained treatment, if required.

Behavior change in the funny papers: feedback to cartoonists on safety belt use

A multiple baseline across 8 nationally syndicated cartoonists evaluated the effects of personal advocacy letters encouraging presentations of a specific prevention message--the depiction of safety belt use in comic strips showing motor vehicle occupants. During baseline these cartoonists depicted safety belt use in only 15% (6 of 41) of their strips with occupied vehicles, but following receipt of a personal letter requesting safety belt use 41% (42 of 102) of their strips depicted safety belt use. Four cartoonists showed clear and immediate increases in depiction of safety belt use, 2 demonstrated delayed and somewhat less consistent belt use, and 2 cartoonists showed no change. The approach and results are discussed with regard to advocacy efforts intended to influence presentation of prevention messages in the media.