Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Comparing cost effectiveness of screening women for Chlamydia trachomatis in systematic and opportunistic approaches
  1. M J Postma1,
  2. R Welte2,
  3. JAR van den Hoek3,
  4. S A Morré4
  1. 1Groningen University Institute for Drug Exploration/University of Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy (GUIDE/GRIP), Groningen, Netherlands
  2. 2National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Center for Health Services Research, Bilthoven, Netherlands
  3. 3Municipal Health Service Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
  4. 4Vrije Universiteit Medical Center, Laboratory of Immunogenetics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to:
 Dr Postma; 

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Screening women for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) infections is indicated to prevent the spread of CT and the development of complications such as pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), chronic pelvic pain, ectopic pregnancy, tubal infertility, and neonatal pneumonia (major outcomes averted; MOA). Cost effectiveness presents an important aspect in the decision making regarding actual implementation. Recently, in this journal Van Valkengoed et al published a paper on the cost effectiveness of systematic screening among women in Amsterdam (Netherlands), using pharmacoeconomic modelling.1 Using the same model, results on the cost effectiveness of an opportunistic screening in the same city have also been published.2 Specific model assumptions differed in both publications. The aim of this letter is to compare cost effectiveness of systematic and opportunistic screening using similar model assumptions and correcting …

View Full Text