Table 1

 Summary of characteristics of economic evaluations of chlamydia screening interventions, in chronological order

First author, year, referenceType of screeningOutcomeModelTarget populationCost effectiveness, screening recommended
SOSPNSONSPMOAShort termStaticTDMFM&FMYesNoComments
SO, selective opportunistic screening; SP, selective population screening; NSO, non-selective opportunistic screening; NSP, non-selective population screening; MOA, major outcome averted; TDM, transmission dynamic model; M, males; F, females; NAAT, nucleic acid amplification test; ICER, incremental cost effectiveness ratio; “–” implies that screening is only cost effective under certain conditions or against certain comparators.
Adams, 200422n/aNoneCost study only
Hu, 200424Annual screening women 15–29 years cost effective. Cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) reported
Blake, 200413Universal NAAT screening most cost effective
Ginocchio, 200326Cost effectiveness if test costs <$18
Mehta, 200225Mass treatment most cost effective
Wang, 200241School based screening cost saving
Postma, 200114Partner notification improves cost effectiveness
Van Valkengoed, 200142NSP screening women 15–40 years not cost effective
Goeree, 200137Screening high risk women most cost effective
Postma, 200127Screen women under 30 years
Welte, 200028Screening may be cost saving in long run. High estimated probability of complications
Townshend, 200029Screening cost saving after 4 years. Poor reporting of cost data
Howell, 200039Screening army recruits is cost effective
Shafer, 199915ICER presented. Judgment unclear
Howell, 199940Age based screen cost saving
Howell, 199830Age based screening most cost effective
Gunn, 199823NoneResult presented as cost per case
Paavonen, 199831NSO screening cost effective even at low prevalence
Genc, 199632Cost effective under specific conditions
Marrazzo, 199733Screening in FP/STD clinics cost saving
Genc, 199334Cost effective under specific conditions
Sellors, 199216NoneSO screening cost effective compared to NSP
Nettleman, 199117NoneNot cost effective to screen all pregnant women
Buhaug, 198918Testing cost effective for women <24 yrs only
Buhaug, 198919Testing cost effective for women 18–24 years only
Begley, 198935NoneScreening in FP clinics is cost effective
Skjeldestad, 198820NoneScreening for women seeking abortion
Trachtenberg, 198821Screening asymptomatic women is cost effective
Phillips, 198736Testing for C. trachomatis is cost effective