The impact of rapid near-patient STI testing on service delivery outcomes: a controlled interrupted time series study - Walter, Scott R; Jackson, Joni; Myring, Gareth; Redaniel, Maria Theresa; Margelyte, Ruta; Gardiner, Rebecca; Clarke, Michael D; Crofts, Megan; McLeod, Hugh; Hollingworth, William; Phillips, David; Muir, Peter; et al. (medRxiv, 2022)
Objectives To evaluate the impact of a new clinic-based rapid STI testing, diagnosis and treatment service on healthcare delivery and resource needs in a sexual health service.Design Controlled interrupted time series study.Setting Two sexual health services in UK: Unity Sexual Health in Bristol, UK (main site) and Croydon Sexual Health in London (control site).Participants Electronic patient records for all attendances during the period one year before and one year after the intervention.Intervention Introduction of an in-clinic rapid testing system for gonorrhoea and chlamydia in combination with revised treatment pathways.Outcome measures Time-to-test notification, staff capacity, cost per episode of care and overall service costs. We also assessed rates of gonorrhoea culture swabs, follow-up attendances, and examinations.Results Time-to-notification and the rate of gonorrhoea swabs significantly decreased following implementation of the new system. There was no evidence of change in follow-up visits or examination rates for patients seen in clinic related to the new system. Staff capacity in clinics appeared to be maintained across the study period. Overall, the number of episodes per week was unchanged in the Unity SHS, and the mean cost per episode decreased by 7.5% (95%CI 5.7%, 9.3%). Conclusions: The clear improvement in time-to-notification, while maintaining activity at a lower overall cost, suggests that the implementation of clinic-based testing in parallel to postal testing kits had the intended impact, which bolsters the case for more widespread rollout in SHS.Strengths and limitations of this studyWe used controlled interrupted time series models with confounder adjustment to estimate the effect of the intervention distinct from any background changes and independent of other time varying factors.Model validity was bolstered by using a relatively long time series with good temporal resolution.Data from both the main and control sites was derived from the same electronic patient record system.There was a general consensus between main and sensitivity analyses.Our study was limited by being non-randomised, having only one control site, and the follow up period for females being truncated by the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Protocols http://hdl.handle.net/1983/79f8f4a6-6710-42e3-b1fd-4fc836ea7618 Funding StatementThis research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration West (ARC West) at University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust (core NIHR infrastructure funded: NIHR200181).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The Research Ethics Committee of the Health Research Authority (South West) gave approval for this work (reference 18/SW/0090).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesOur data sharing agreement with the data controllers prohibits sharing data extracts outside of the University of Bristol research team.