Malotte, C. K., Ledsky, R., Hogben, M., Larro, M., Middlestadt, S., St. Lawrence, J. S., Olthoff, G., Settlage, R. H., Van Devanter, N. L., Paxton, K., Smith, L. V., Davis, R., Richwald, G. A., Penniman, T. V., Gaines, J., Merzel, C., Messeri, P., Bleakley, A., Weifuse, I., ... Pequegnat, W. (2004). Comparison of methods to increase repeat testing in persons treated for gonorrhea and/or chlamydia at public sexually transmitted disease clinics. Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 31(11), 637-642. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.olq.0000143083.38684.9d
Malotte, CK, Ledsky, R, Hogben, M, Larro, M, Middlestadt, S, St. Lawrence, JS, Olthoff, G, Settlage, RH, Van Devanter, NL, Paxton, K, Smith, LV, Davis, R, Richwald, GA, Penniman, TV, Gaines, J, Merzel, C, Messeri, P, Bleakley, A, Weifuse, I, Cohall, A, Blank, S, Cohall, RM, Levine, D, Peake, M, Zenilman, J, VanBlerk, G, Ukairo, C, Gift, TL & Pequegnat, W 2004, 'Comparison of methods to increase repeat testing in persons treated for gonorrhea and/or chlamydia at public sexually transmitted disease clinics', Sexually Transmitted Diseases, vol. 31, n.º 11, pp. 637-642. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.olq.0000143083.38684.9d
Malotte CK, Ledsky R, Hogben M, Larro M, Middlestadt S, St. Lawrence JS et al. Comparison of methods to increase repeat testing in persons treated for gonorrhea and/or chlamydia at public sexually transmitted disease clinics. Sexually Transmitted Diseases. 2004 nov.;31(11):637-642. doi: 10.1097/01.olq.0000143083.38684.9d
@article{97f27bf62eb94b8aa9c50a7bfd9d8123,
title = "Comparison of methods to increase repeat testing in persons treated for gonorrhea and/or chlamydia at public sexually transmitted disease clinics",
abstract = "Background: Retesting 3 to 4 months after treatment for those infected with chlamydia and/or gonorrhea has been recommended. Goal: We compared various methods of encouraging return for retesting 3 months after treatment for chlamydia or gonorrhea. Study: In study 1, participants were randomly assigned to: 1) brief recommendation to return, 2) intervention 1 plus $20 incentive paid at return visit, or 3) intervention 1 plus motivational counseling at the first visit and a phone reminder at 3 months. In study 2, participants at 1 clinic were randomly assigned to 4) intervention 1,5) intervention 1 plus phone reminder, or 6) intervention 1 plus motivational counseling but no telephone reminder. Results: Using multiple logistic regression, the odds ratios for interventions 2 and 3, respectively, compared with intervention 1 were 1.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-2.5) and 2.6 (95% CI, 1.3-5.0). The odds ratios for interventions 5 and 6 compared with intervention 4 were 18.1 (95% CI, 1.7-193.5) and 4.6 (95% CI, 0.4-58.0). Conclusions: A monetary incentive did not increase return rates compared with a brief recommendation. A reminder phone call seemed to be the most effective method to increase return.",
author = "Malotte, {C. Kevin} and Rebecca Ledsky and Matthew Hogben and Michelle Larro and Susan Middlestadt and {St. Lawrence}, {Janet S.} and Glen Olthoff and Settlage, {Robert H.} and {Van Devanter}, {Nancy L.} and Keisha Paxton and Smith, {Lisa V.} and Robyn Davis and Richwald, {Gary A.} and Penniman, {Typhanye V.} and James Gaines and Cheryl Merzel and Peter Messeri and Amy Bleakley and Isaac Weifuse and Alwyn Cohall and Susan Blank and Cohall, {Renee Mayer} and Deborah Levine and Michele Peake and Jonathan Zenilman and Gillian VanBlerk and Chizoba Ukairo and Gift, {Thomas L.} and Willo Pequegnat",
year = "2004",
month = nov,
doi = "10.1097/01.olq.0000143083.38684.9d",
language = "English",
volume = "31",
pages = "637--642",
journal = "Sexually Transmitted Diseases",
issn = "0148-5717",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "11",
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of methods to increase repeat testing in persons treated for gonorrhea and/or chlamydia at public sexually transmitted disease clinics
AU - Malotte, C. Kevin
AU - Ledsky, Rebecca
AU - Hogben, Matthew
AU - Larro, Michelle
AU - Middlestadt, Susan
AU - St. Lawrence, Janet S.
AU - Olthoff, Glen
AU - Settlage, Robert H.
AU - Van Devanter, Nancy L.
AU - Paxton, Keisha
AU - Smith, Lisa V.
AU - Davis, Robyn
AU - Richwald, Gary A.
AU - Penniman, Typhanye V.
AU - Gaines, James
AU - Merzel, Cheryl
AU - Messeri, Peter
AU - Bleakley, Amy
AU - Weifuse, Isaac
AU - Cohall, Alwyn
AU - Blank, Susan
AU - Cohall, Renee Mayer
AU - Levine, Deborah
AU - Peake, Michele
AU - Zenilman, Jonathan
AU - VanBlerk, Gillian
AU - Ukairo, Chizoba
AU - Gift, Thomas L.
AU - Pequegnat, Willo
PY - 2004/11
Y1 - 2004/11
N2 - Background: Retesting 3 to 4 months after treatment for those infected with chlamydia and/or gonorrhea has been recommended. Goal: We compared various methods of encouraging return for retesting 3 months after treatment for chlamydia or gonorrhea. Study: In study 1, participants were randomly assigned to: 1) brief recommendation to return, 2) intervention 1 plus $20 incentive paid at return visit, or 3) intervention 1 plus motivational counseling at the first visit and a phone reminder at 3 months. In study 2, participants at 1 clinic were randomly assigned to 4) intervention 1,5) intervention 1 plus phone reminder, or 6) intervention 1 plus motivational counseling but no telephone reminder. Results: Using multiple logistic regression, the odds ratios for interventions 2 and 3, respectively, compared with intervention 1 were 1.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-2.5) and 2.6 (95% CI, 1.3-5.0). The odds ratios for interventions 5 and 6 compared with intervention 4 were 18.1 (95% CI, 1.7-193.5) and 4.6 (95% CI, 0.4-58.0). Conclusions: A monetary incentive did not increase return rates compared with a brief recommendation. A reminder phone call seemed to be the most effective method to increase return.
AB - Background: Retesting 3 to 4 months after treatment for those infected with chlamydia and/or gonorrhea has been recommended. Goal: We compared various methods of encouraging return for retesting 3 months after treatment for chlamydia or gonorrhea. Study: In study 1, participants were randomly assigned to: 1) brief recommendation to return, 2) intervention 1 plus $20 incentive paid at return visit, or 3) intervention 1 plus motivational counseling at the first visit and a phone reminder at 3 months. In study 2, participants at 1 clinic were randomly assigned to 4) intervention 1,5) intervention 1 plus phone reminder, or 6) intervention 1 plus motivational counseling but no telephone reminder. Results: Using multiple logistic regression, the odds ratios for interventions 2 and 3, respectively, compared with intervention 1 were 1.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-2.5) and 2.6 (95% CI, 1.3-5.0). The odds ratios for interventions 5 and 6 compared with intervention 4 were 18.1 (95% CI, 1.7-193.5) and 4.6 (95% CI, 0.4-58.0). Conclusions: A monetary incentive did not increase return rates compared with a brief recommendation. A reminder phone call seemed to be the most effective method to increase return.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=7044245627&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=7044245627&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/01.olq.0000143083.38684.9d
DO - 10.1097/01.olq.0000143083.38684.9d
M3 - Article
C2 - 15502669
AN - SCOPUS:7044245627
SN - 0148-5717
VL - 31
SP - 637
EP - 642
JO - Sexually Transmitted Diseases
JF - Sexually Transmitted Diseases
IS - 11
ER -