You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Poster Presentations
PS02 – POSTER VIEWING SESSION – TUESDAY
Tuesday, July 16, 2019 5:45 PM – 7:00 PM
P737 Evaluating syphilis partner notification outcomes in seven jurisdictions
Free
  1. Anna Cope1,
  2. James Matthias2,
  3. Mohammad Rahman3,
  4. Jill Diesel4,
  5. River Pugsley5,
  6. Julia Schillinger6,
  7. Rilene Ng7,
  8. Ellen Klingler8,
  9. Victoria Mobley9,
  10. Erika Samoff9,
  11. Kyle Bernstein10,
  12. Thomas Peterman11
  1. 1Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of STD Prevention, Raleigh, USA
  2. 2Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of STD Prevention, Tallahassee, USA
  3. 3Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of STD Prevention, New Orleans, USA
  4. 4CDC, MDHHS, NCHHSTP, DSTDP, STD Section, Detroit, USA
  5. 5Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of STD Prevention, Richmond, USA
  6. 6Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of STD Prevention, New York City, USA
  7. 7Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of STD Prevention, San Francisco, USA
  8. 8New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, New York City, USA
  9. 9North Carolina Division of Public Health, Communicable Disease Branch, Raleigh, USA
  10. 10Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA
  11. 11Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of STD Prevention, Atlanta, USA

Abstract

Background The effectiveness of partner notification services (PNS) for limiting syphilis transmission relies on the ability of disease intervention specialists (DIS) to find and assure treatment of partners. We measured estimates of partners found and treated due to PNS in seven jurisdictions.

Methods We reviewed early syphilis cases (primary, secondary, early latent) reported during 2015–2017 in seven jurisdictions in the United States (Florida, Louisiana, Michigan, North Carolina, Virginia, New York City, and San Francisco). We measured the numbers of: early syphilis (index) cases interviewed by DIS, (sex) partners reported (primary cases: ≤3 months; secondary cases: ≤6 months; early latent cases: ≤1 year), partners with enough locating information to begin PNS, partners treated prophylactically, and infected partners brought in for treatment resulting from PNS. We considered partners to be brought to treatment by PNS if: 1) a DIS-assigned disposition code indicated “brought to treatment” or 2) the partner was treated 0–90 days after the index case was interviewed.

Results DIS interviewed 23,428 index patients with early syphilis (range among jurisdictions 1,106–9,388), representing 78.9% of reported cases (50.1%–99.5%). Of those interviewed, 18,482 (78.9%) reported 78,960 partners, of whom 20,771 (26.3%) had enough locating information to begin PNS. Among these partners initiated for PNS, 5,851 were unlocatable/refused PNS (28.2%, range: 23.9%–38.8%), 5,959 were prophylactically treated (28.6%, range: 2.1%–39.8%) and 5,905 were classified as infected and brought to treatment (28.4%; range: 12.1%–37.3%). After excluding partners treated before (n=1,436) and ≥90 days after (n=90) the index case interview, 4,379 partners were considered infected and brought to treatment (0.15 partners per reported case [range 0.02–0.50] or 0.18 partners per interviewed case [range 0.05–0.60]).

Conclusion For every 5 to 6 index patients interviewed, PNS resulted in 1 infected partner brought to treatment. The success of DIS in finding and bringing partners to treatment varied across jurisdictions.

Disclosure No significant relationships.

  • syphilis
  • networks and partner notification

https://doi.org/10.1136/sextrans-2019-sti.797

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    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.