You are here

  • Home
  • Online First
  • Factors associated with the co-occurrence of bacterial sexually transmitted infections in New Zealand: a population-based cohort

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Letter
Factors associated with the co-occurrence of bacterial sexually transmitted infections in New Zealand: a population-based cohort
  1. Zoe Kumbaroff1,
  2. Andrew Anglemyer1,2,
  3. Julia Scott1,
  4. Putu Duff1,
  5. Callum E Thirkell1,
  6. Tony Walls3
  1. 1Institute of Environmental Science and Research Ltd, Porirua, New Zealand
  2. 2University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
  3. 3University of Otago Christchurch, Christchurch, New Zealand
  1. Correspondence to Dr Andrew Anglemyer, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand; andrew.anglemyer{at}otago.ac.nz

https://doi.org/10.1136/sextrans-2024-056226

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.

    The Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ) Sexually Transmitted and Blood Borne Infection Strategy 2023–2030 aims to reduce sexually transmitted infection (STI) incidence and improve health outcomes for inequitably affected groups, including Māori, Pacific peoples, young people and men who have sex with men (MSM).1 In the current analysis, we build on the methods and analysis strategies previously described2 to create a national-level population-based cohort of STI among people aged 15+ years; we aim to examine predictors of gonorrhoea, chlamydia or syphilis coinfections between 2018 and 2022 in NZ.

    The Institute of Environmental Science and Research (ESR), a Crown Research Institute, manages, analyses and reports the data for the NZ STI surveillance system.3 Gonorrhoea and syphilis are both notifiable diseases in NZ, and chlamydia is not notifiable. ESR obtains chlamydia and gonorrhoea case data through laboratory surveillance, while syphilis case data are while syphilis case data are submitted by treating clinicians.

    National Health Index numbers (NHIs), unique to each person who has received healthcare in NZ, were used to link STI cases. STIs diagnosed within 30 days of each other were considered coinfections. Testing history was available for chlamydia and gonorrhoea cases through laboratory data and matched using NHIs.

    To determine the odds of having coinfection, we performed a logistic regression. The covariates considered …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Handling editor Anna Maria Geretti

    • Contributors ZK conceptualised and implemented the overall study design, implemented the epidemiological methods. AA led interpretation of analyses, drafted the manuscript, and provided epidemiological and writing support on the manuscript. JS provided clinical expertise in sexual health medicine, interpretation of analyses and writing support on the manuscript. PD provided technical expertise in epidemiological methods and provided support in writing support the manuscript. CET contributed to the conceptual and technical support early in the study design phase of the project, and provided epidemiological and writing support on the manuscript. TW provided clinical expertise in infectious diseases, interpretation of analyses and writing support on the manuscript.

    • Funding This work was supported by funds from the New Zealand Ministry of Health STI Surveillance.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.