Heumann Christine L, Katz David A, Dombrowski Julia C, Bennett Amy B, Manhart Lisa E, Golden Matthew R
From the *Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI; †Department of Medicine, University of Washington; ‡Public Health-Seattle and King County HIV/STD Program; §Department of Medicine, Division of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and ¶Departments of Epidemiology and Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Sex Transm Dis. 2017 Apr;44(4):249-254. doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000583.
The relative effectiveness of in-person versus telephone interviews for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/sexually transmitted disease partner services (PS) is uncertain.
We compared outcomes of in-person versus telephone PS interviews for early syphilis (ES) and newly diagnosed HIV in King County, Washington from 2010 to 2014. We used multivariable Poisson regression to evaluate indices (number of partners per original patient [OP]) for partners named, notified, tested, diagnosed, and treated (ES only). Analyses controlled for OP age, sex, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, time to interview, place of diagnosis, and staff performing interviews.
For ES, 682 and 646 OPs underwent in-person and telephone interviews, respectively. In-person syphilis PS were associated with higher indices of partners named (in-person index [IPI], 3.43; telephone index [TI], 2.06; adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.55-1.82), notified (IPI, 1.70; TI, 1.13; aRR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.24-1.56), tested (IPI, 1.15; TI, 0.72; aRR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.16-1.54), and empirically treated (IPI, 1.03; TI, 0.74; aRR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.03-1.37), but no difference in infected partners treated (IPI, 0.28; TI, 0.24; aRR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.72-1.21). For HIV, 358 and 489 OPs underwent in-person and telephone interviews, respectively. In-person HIV PS were associated with higher indices of partners named (IPI, 1.87; TI, 1.28; aRR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.18-1.62), notified (IPI, 1.38; TI, 0.92; aRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.03-1.50), and newly diagnosed with HIV (IPI, 0.10; TI, 0.05; aRR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.04-4.50), but no difference in partners tested (IPI, 0.61; TI, 0.48; aRR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.88-1.52).
Although in-person syphilis PS were associated with some increased PS indices, they did not increase the treatment of infected partners. In contrast, in-person HIV PS resulted in increased HIV case finding. These data support prioritizing in-person PS for HIV and suggest that in-person PS for syphilis may not have major public health benefit.
面对面访谈与电话访谈在人类免疫缺陷病毒（HIV）/性传播疾病性伴服务（PS）中的相对有效性尚不确定。
我们比较了2010年至2014年在华盛顿州金县针对早期梅毒（ES）和新诊断HIV进行面对面与电话PS访谈的结果。我们使用多变量泊松回归来评估被提及、被通知、接受检测、被诊断和接受治疗（仅针对ES）的性伴的指标（每名原患者[OP]的性伴数量）。分析控制了OP的年龄、性别、种族/族裔、性取向、访谈时间、诊断地点以及进行访谈的工作人员。
对于ES，分别有682名和646名OP接受了面对面访谈和电话访谈。面对面梅毒PS与更高的被提及性伴指标相关（面对面指标[IPI]，3.43；电话指标[TI]，2.06；调整后相对风险[aRR]，1.68；95%置信区间[CI]，1.55-1.82）、被通知性伴指标（IPI，1.70；TI，1.13；aRR, 1.39；95% CI，1.24-1.56）、接受检测性伴指标（IPI，1.15；TI，0.72；aRR，1.34；95% CI，1.16-1.54）以及经验性治疗性伴指标（IPI，1.03；TI，0.74；aRR，1.19；95% CI，1.03-1.37），但在接受治疗的感染性伴方面无差异（IPI，0.28；TI，0.24；aRR，0.93；95% CI，0.72-1.21）。对于HIV，分别有358名和489名OP接受了面对面访谈和电话访谈。面对面HIV PS与更高的被提及性伴指标相关（IPI，1.87；TI，1.28；aRR，1.38；95% CI，1.18-1.62）、被通知性伴指标（IPI，1.38；TI，0.92；aRR，1.24；95% CI，1.03-1.50）以及新诊断HIV性伴指标（IPI，0.10；TI，0.05；aRR，2.17；95% CI，1.04-4.50），但在接受检测的性伴方面无差异（IPI，0.61；TI，0.48；aRR，1.15；95% CI，0.88-1.52）。
尽管面对面梅毒PS与一些PS指标的增加相关，但并未增加对感染性伴的治疗。相比之下，面对面HIV PS导致发现更多HIV病例。这些数据支持将面对面PS用于HIV的优先地位，并表明面对面梅毒PS可能没有重大的公共卫生益处。
