Using intervention mapping for the development of a targeted secure web-based outreach strategy named SafeFriend, for Chlamydia trachomatis testing in young people at risk

BMC Public Health

Nicole HTM Dukers-Muijrers³  Marianne AB van der Sande¹  Jan EAM van Bergen⁴  Nanne K de Vries²  Chakib Kara-Zaïtri⁶  Rik Crutzen²  Christian JPA Hoebe³  Kevin ATM Theunissen⁵ 

[1] Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands;Department of Health Promotion, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC+), Maastricht, The Netherlands;Department of Medical Microbiology Maastricht Infection Centre (MINC), School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC+), Maastricht, The Netherlands;Department of General Practice, AMC-University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands;Department of Sexual Health, Infectious Diseases and Environmental Health, Public Health Services South Limburg, Geleen, The Netherlands;In-Fact, Bradford, UK

关键词: Peer influence;    Sexual networks;    Social networks;    Web-based respondent driven sampling;    Partner notification;    Screening;    Chlamydia trachomatis;    Intervention mapping;   

Others  :  1161626
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2458-13-996

 received in 2012-12-11, accepted in 2013-10-15,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Many young people at high risk for Chlamydia trachomatis (Ct) are not reached by current sexual health care systems, such as general practitioners and public sexual health care centres (sexually transmitted infection clinics).Ct is the most frequently diagnosed bacterial sexually transmitted infection (STI) among sexually active people and in particular young heterosexuals. Innovative screening strategies are needed to interrupt the transmission of Ct among young people and connect the hidden cases to care.

Methods

Intervention Mapping (IM), a systematic approach to develop theory- and evidence-based interventions, was used to develop a strategy to target Ct testing towards young people who are currently hidden to care in The Netherlands. Both clinical users (i.e. sexual health care nurses) and public users (i.e., young people at risk for Ct) were closely involved in the IM process. A needs assessment study was carried out using semi-structured interviews among users (N = 21), a literature search and by taking lessons learned from existing screening programmes. Theoretical methods and practical applications to reach high risk young people and influence testing were selected and translated into specific programme components.

Results

The IM approach resulted in the development of a secure and web-based outreach Ct screening strategy, named SafeFriend. It is developed to target groups of high-risk young people who are currently hidden to care. Key methods include web-based Respondent Driven Sampling, starting from young Ct positive sexual health care centre clients, to reach and motivate peers (i.e., sex partners and friends) to get tested for Ct. Testing and the motivation of peers were proposed as the desired behavioural outcomes and the Precaution Adoption Process Model was chosen as theoretical framework. End users, i.e., young people and sexual health care nurses were interviewed and included in the development process to increase the success of implementation.

Conclusions

IM proved useful to develop an intervention for targeted Ct testing among young people. We believe this to be the first web-based outreach screening strategy which combines chain referral sampling with the delivery of targeted Ct testing to high risk young people within their sexual and social networks.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Theunissen et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]National Institute for Public Health and the Environment: Nationaal soa/hiv-plan 2012-2016: 'bestendigen en versterken. 2011, 13,14, 18,19. Report 215111001/2011 Bilthoven http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten-en-publicaties/rapporten/2011/12/05/nationaal-soa-hiv-plan-2012-2016-bestendigen-en-versterken.html webcite
• [2]Soetens LC, Koedijk FDH, van den Broek IVF, Vriend HJ, Op de Coul ELM, van Sighem AI, Stirbu-Wagner I, van Benthem BHB: STI, including HIV, in the Netherlands in 2012. 2011, 3-51. Annual Report 150002003 Bilthoven http://www.rivm.nl/Documenten_en_publicaties/Wetenschappelijk/Rapporten/2013/juni/Sexually_transmitted_infections_including_HIV_in_the_Netherlands_in_2012 webcite
• [3]Geisler WM: Duration of Untreated, Uncomplicated Chlamydia trachomatis Genital Infection and Factors Associated with Chlamydia Resolution: a Review of Human Studies. JID 2010, 201(Suppl 2):s104-s113.
• [4]Wand H, Guy R, Donovan B, McNulty A: Developing and validating a risk scoring tool for chlamydia infection among sexual health clinic attendees in Australia: a simple algorithm to identify those at high risk of chlamydia infection. BMJ Open 2011, 1:e000005. Doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2010-000005
• [5]Haggerty CL, Gotliebb SL, Taylor BD, Low N, Xu F, Ness RB: Risk of Sequelae after Chlamydia trachomatis Genital Infection in Women. JID 2010, 201(Suppl2):s134-s155.
• [6]Novak DP, Karlsson BR: Simplifying chlamydia testing: an innovative Chlamydia trachomatis testing approach using the internet and a home sampling strategy: population based study. Sex Trans Infect 2006, 82:142-147. doi: 10.1136/sti.2005.016832
• [7]Novak D, Novak M: Use of the Internet for home testing for Chlamydia trachomatis in Sweden: who are the users? Int J of STD AIDS 2012, 23:83-87. Doi:10.1258/ijsa.2011.011030
• [8]Bracebrigde S, Bachmann MO, Ramkhelawon K, Woolnough A: Evaluation of a systematic postal screening and treatment service for genital Chlamydia trachomatis, with remote clinic access via the internet: a cross-sectional study, East of England. Sex Trans Infect 2012, 88(5):375-381. Doi:10.1136/sextrans-2011-050267
• [9]Gaydos CA, Dwyer K, Barnes M, Rizzo-Price PA, Wood BJ, Flemming T, Hogan MT: Internet-Based Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis to Reach Nonclinic Populations With Mailed Self-Administered Vaginal Swabs. Sex Trans Dis 2006, 33(7):451-457. doi: 10.1097/01.olq.0000200497.14326.fb
• [10]Van Den Broek IVF: Chlamydia Screening Implementation Netherlands, Impact evaluation and cost-effectiveness. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM). 2010, 22,113. Report 210261008 Bilthoven http://www.rivm.nl/bibliotheek/rapporten/210261008.html webcite
• [11]Jenkins WD, Weis R, Campbell P, Barnes M, Barnes P, Gaydos C: Comparative effectiveness of two self-collected sample kit distribution systems for Chlamydia screening on a university campus. Sex Trans Infect 2012, 88:363-367.
• [12]Mishra S, Sgaier SK, Thompson LH, Moses S, Ramesh BM, Alary M, Wilson D, Blanchard JF: HIV epidemic appraisals for assisting in the design of effective prevention programmes: shifting the paradigm back to basic. Plos One 2012, 7(3):e32324. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0032324
• [13]Aral SO, Leichliter JS, Blanchard JF: Overview: the role of emergent properties of complex systems in the epidemiology and prevention of sexually transmitted infections including HIV infection. Sex Trans Infect 2010, 86(Suppl3):iii1-iii3.
• [14]Robinson K, Cohen T, Colijn C: The dynamics of sexual contact networks: effects on disease spread and control. Theor Pop Biol 2012., 81(2) Doi:10.1016/j.tpb.2011.12.009
• [15]Drumright LN, Frost SDW: Rapid social network assessment for predicting HIV and STI risk among men attending bars and clubs in San Diego California. Sex Trans Infect 2010, 86(3):iii17-iii23.
• [16]Rothenberg R: The tranformation of Partner Notification. CID 2002, 35(2):S138-S145.
• [17]Youm Y, Laumann EO: Social Network Effects on the Transmission of STI. Sex Trans Dis 2002, 29(11):689-697.
• [18]Wejnert C, Heckathorn DD: Web-Based Network Sampling: efficiency and Efficacy of RDS. Soc Meth Res 2008, 37:105-134.
• [19]Malekinejad M, Johnston LG, Kendall C, Kerr LRFS, Rifkin MR, Rutherfors GW: Using Respondent-Driven Sampling Methodology for HIV Biological and Behavioral Surveillance in International Settings: a systematic review. AIDS Behav 2008, 12:S105-S130.
• [20]Heckathorn DD, Semaan S, Broadhead RS, Hughes JS: Extensions of respondent-driven sampling: A new approach to the study of injection drug users aged 18-25. AIDS Behav 2002, 6:55-67.
• [21]Johnston LG, Whitehead S, Simic-Lawson M, Kendall C: Formative research to optimize respondent dirven sampling surveys among hard-to-reach populations in HIV behavioral and biological surveillance: lessens learned from four case studies. AIDS Care 2010, 22(6):784-792.
• [22]Bartholomew LK, Parcel GS, Kok G, Gottlieb NH, Fernandez ME: Planning health promotion programs: an intervention mapping approach. United States of America: John Wiley & Sons; 2011.
• [23]van Oostrom SH, Anema JR, Terluin B, Venema A, de Vet HCW, van Mechelen W: Development of a workplace intervention for sick-listed employees with stress-related mental disorders: intervention Mapping as a useful tool. BMC Health Serv Res 2007, 7:12. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-127
• [24]Wolfers MEG, van den Hoek C, Brug J, de Zwart O: Using Intervention Mapping to develop a programme to prevent sexually transmittable infections, including HIV, among heterosexual migrant men. BMC Public Health 2007, 7:141. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-7-141
• [25]van Empelen P, Kok G, Schaalma HP, Bartholomew LK: An AIDS Risk Reduction Program for Dutch Drug Users: An Intervention Mapping Approach to Planning. Health Promot Pract 2003, 4(4):402-412. doi: 10.1177/1524839903255421
• [26]Green LW, Kreuter MW: Health Program Planning: An Educational and Ecological Approach. 4th edition. NY: McGraw-Hill Higher Education; 2005.
• [27]Central Committee on Research inv. Human Subjects (CCMO). http://www.ccmo-online.nl/main.asp?pid=43&thid=57&catid=2 webcite
• [28]Weinstein ND, Sandman PM: A model of the Precaution Adoption Process: Evidence From Home Radon Testing. Health Psychol 1992, 11(3):170-180.
• [29]van Bergen J, Gotz HM, Richardus JH, Hoebe CJPA, Broer J, Coenen AJT: Prevalence of urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis increases significantly with level of urbanisation and suggests targeted screening approaches: results from the first national population based study in the Netherlands. Sex Trans Infect 2005, 81:17-23. doi: 10.1136/sti.2004.010173
• [30]Trienekens SCM, Vriend HJ, Koedijk FDH, Van Den Broek IVF, Vriend HJ, Op De Coul ELM, Van Veen MG, Van Sighem AI, Stirbu Wagner I, Van Der Sande MAB: Sexually transmitted infections, including HIV, in the Netherlands in 2011. National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM). 2012, 39-49. Annual Report 201051001 Bilthoven http://www.rivm.nl/Documenten_en_publicaties/Wetenschappelijk/Rapporten/2012/juni/Sexually_transmitted_infections_including_HIV_in_the_Netherlands_in_2011 webcite
• [31]Greenland KE, Op De Coul ELM, Van Bergen JEAM, Brouwers EEHG, Fennema HJSA, Gotz HM, Hoebe CJPA, Koekenbier RH, Pars LL, Van Ravesteijn SM, Van Den Broek IVF: Acceptability of the Internet-Based Chlamydia Screening Implementation in the Netherlands and Insights Into Nonresponse. Sex Trans Dis 2011, 38:6.
• [32]Potard C, Courtois R, Rusch E: The influence of peers on risky sexual behaviour during adolescence. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2008, 13(3):264-270.
• [33]Fichtenberg CM, Muth SQ, Brown B, Padain NS, Glass TA, Ellen JM: Sexual network position and risk of sexually transmitted infections. Sex Trans Dis 2009, 85:493-498. doi: 10.1136/sti.2009.036681
• [34]Brewer D: Case-finding effectiveness of partner notification and cluster investigation for sexually transmitted diseases/HIV. Sex Trans Dis 2005, 32(2):78-83.
• [35]Samkange-Zeeb FN, Spallek L, Zeeb H: Awareness and knowledge of STIs among school-going adolescents in Europe: asystematic review of published literature. BMC Public Health 2011, 11:727.
• [36]Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Summary of a review of the literature: Programs to Promote Chlamydia Screening. http://www.cdc.gov/STI/HealthComm/ChlamydiaLitReview2008.pdf webcite
• [37]Tilson EC, Sanchez V, Ford CL, Smurzynski M, Leone PA, Fox KK, Irwin K, Miller WC: Barriers to asymptomatic screening and other STD services for adolescents and young adults: focus group discussions. BMC Public Health 2004, 21(4):1-8.
• [38]Barth KR, Cook RL, Downs JS, Switzer GE, Fischhoff B: Social Stigma and Negative Consequences: Factors That influence College Students’ Decisions to Seek Testing for Sexually Transmitted Infections. J of Am Coll Health 2003, 50(4):153-159.
• [39]Blake D, Kearney M, Oakes JM, Druker S, Bibace R: Improving participation in chlamydia screening programs: perspectives of high-risk youth. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2003, 157:523-529.
• [40]Gotz HM, Veldhuijzen IK, van Bergen JEAM, Hoebe CJPA, de Zwart O, Richardus JH: Acceptability and Consequences of Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis by Home-Based Urine Testing. Sex Trans Dis 2005, 32(9):557-562. doi: 10.1097/01.olq.0000175416.15905.db
• [41]Østergaard L, Andersen B, Møller JK, Olesen F, Worm AM: Managing partners of people diagnosed with Chlamydia trachomatis: a comparison of two partner testing methods. Sex Transm Infect 2003, 79:358-362.
• [42]Temple-Smith M, Hopkins C, Fairley C, Tomnay J, Pavlin N, Parker R, Russell D, Bowden F, Hocking J, Pitts M, Chen M: The right thing to do: patients’ views and experiences of telling partners about chlamydia. Fam Pract 2010, 27:418-423. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmq028
• [43]Bilardi JE, Fairley CK, Hopkins CA, Hocking JS, Temple Smith MJ, Bowden FJ, Russell DB, Pitts M, Tomnay JE, Parker RM, Pavlin NL, Chen MY: Experiences and Outcomes of Partner Notification Among Men and Women Recently Diagnosed With Chlamydia and Their Views on Innovative Resources Aimed at Improving Notification Rates. Sex Trans Dis 2010, 37:4.
• [44]Burnet Institute: Partner Notification of Sexually Transmitted Infections in New South Wales: an informed literature review. http://www.stipu.nsw.gov.au/content/Document/NSW_STI_PN_PDF.pdf webcite
• [45]Rothenberg RB, Sterk C, Toomey KE, Potterat JJ, Johnson D, Schrader M, Hatch S: Using Social Network and Ethnographic Tools to Evaluate Syphilis Transmission. Sex Trans Dis 1998, 25(3):154-160.
• [46]Choi KH, Ning Z, Gregorisch SE, Pan QP: The Influence of Social and Sexual Networks in the Spread of HIV and Syphilis Among Men Who Have Sex With Men in Shanghai. Epidemiol Soc Sci 2007, 45(1):77-84.
• [47]Trelle S, Shang A, Nartey L, Cassell JA, Low N: Improved effectiveness of partner notification for patients with sexually transmitted infections: systematic review. BMJ 2007, 334(7589):354.
• [48]Jenkins WD, Wold B: Use of the Internet for the surveillance and prevention of sexually transmitted diseases. Microbes Infect 2012, 14:427-437.
• [49]Levine D, Woodruff AJ, Mocello AR, Lebrija J, Klausner JD: inSPOT: The First Online STD Partner Notification System Using Electronic Postcards. Plos Med 2008, 5(10):213.
• [50]Alam N, Chamot E, Vermund SH, Streatfield K, Kristensen S: Partner notification for STI in developing countries: a systematic review. BMC Public Health 2010, 10(19):1471-2458.
• [51]Hogben M, Kissinger P: A Review of Partner Notification for Sex Partners of Men Infected With Chlamydia. Sex Trans Dis 2008, 35(11):S34-S39.
• [52]Rogers WA: Ethical issues in public health: a qualitative study of public health practice in Scotland. J Epidemiol Community Health 2004, 58:446-450. Doi:10.1136/jech.2003.013417