title: Time to treatment for women with chlamydial or gonococcal infections: a comparative evaluation of sexually transmitted disease clinics in 3 US cities.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Many women with positive screening tests for chlamydia or gonorrhea are not promptly treated and are at risk for complications and further disease transmission. Improved methods for notifying infected patients might increase timely treatment in this population.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  Describe notification procedures at STD clinics in Washington, DC; Los Angeles; and San Diego and compare timeliness of treatment during 2000 to 2002.
  
  
  METHODS
  Interviews were conducted to determine methods for notifying infected patients. Data were abstracted from 327 medical records of women with chlamydia or gonorrhea who had not been treated presumptively. The interval between specimen collection and treatment ("time to treatment") was calculated.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Each clinic had different procedures for notifying untreated infected women. Among those treated, the median time to treatment was 18 days in Washington, DC, and 8 days in Los Angeles. In San Diego, the median time to treatment was initially 14 days, which improved to 7 days after patient-notification procedures were changed.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Simple changes in patient notification procedures can decrease time to treatment at STD clinics. STD programs should evaluate time to treatment and institute methods for efficient patient follow-up.
authors.affiliation: Epidemic Intelligence Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, USA. acq6@cdc.gov
authors.forename: David
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Wong
authors.forename: Stuart M
authors.initials: SM
authors.lastname: Berman
authors.forename: Bruce W
authors.initials: BW
authors.lastname: Furness
authors.forename: Robert A
authors.initials: RA
authors.lastname: Gunn
authors.forename: Melanie
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Taylor
authors.forename: Thomas A
authors.initials: TA
authors.lastname: Peterman
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D002140:California / Q000453:epidemiology; D002690:Chlamydia Infections / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000209:etiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D002692:Chlamydia trachomatis / Q000302:isolation & purification*; D016358:Contact Tracing / Q000379:methods*; D004219:District of Columbia / Q000453:epidemiology; D005260:Female; D006069:Gonorrhea / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000209:etiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D006801:Humans; D007407:Interviews as Topic; D008499:Medical Records; D009344:Neisseria gonorrhoeae / Q000302:isolation & purification*; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013997:Time Factors
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991 Jun;164(6 Pt 2):1771-81
references.pmid: 2039031
references.citation: Sex Transm Dis. 1999 Oct;26(9):496-9
references.pmid: 10534201
references.citation: JAMA. 1994 Sep 21;272(11):867-70
references.pmid: 8078164
references.citation: MMWR Recomm Rep. 2002 Oct 18;51(RR-15):1-38; quiz CE1-4
references.pmid: 12418541
references.citation: Am J Public Health. 2003 Jun;93(6):882-4
references.pmid: 12773344
references.citation: Sex Transm Dis. 1997 Nov;24(10):587-92
references.pmid: 9383848
references.citation: Sex Transm Dis. 1997 Mar;24(3):131-41
references.pmid: 9132979
references.citation: Sex Transm Dis. 1990 Jan-Mar;17(1):10-4
references.pmid: 2106171
references.citation: J Clin Microbiol. 2002 Oct;40(10):3757-63
references.pmid: 12354877
references.citation: Sex Transm Dis. 1999 Apr;26(4):232-40
references.pmid: 10225593
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Jan;176(1 Pt 1):103-7
references.pmid: 9024098
references.citation: Sex Transm Dis. 1999 Sep;26(8):421-5
references.pmid: 10494931
references.citation: Sex Transm Dis. 1997 Apr;24(4):181-4
references.pmid: 9101628