荷兰性传播感染（特别是衣原体感染）在线检测供应商的评估和列举。
Evaluation and enumeration of online test providers for sexually transmitted infections, specifically chlamydia, in the Netherlands.
机构信息
Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
Interdisciplinary Social Science, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
出版信息
Sex Transm Infect. 2019 Aug;95(5):380-385. doi: 10.1136/sextrans-2018-053771. Epub 2019 Jan 22.
OBJECTIVES
Online testing for STIs might complement regular care provided by general practitioners or STI clinics. Two types of online testing can be distinguished, self-testing and self-sampling (sending sample to a laboratory for diagnosis). Online testing can occur without consultation with a healthcare professional, therefore information given by providers is essential for informed decision-making. We aimed to enumerate online test providers in the Netherlands focusing on chlamydia tests, to evaluate information using quality indicators and to gain insight on the proportion of online testing in the STI testing arena.
METHODS
We performed a systematic internet search to identify online STI test providers. Twenty quality indicators were evaluated on their websites; indicator scores were weighted by level of importance (expert opinion). High scoring providers were recommended, on the condition that the sensitivity and specificity of the test were above 95% and providers included a follow-up procedure in case of a positive result. Finally, providers were contacted to inquire about the number of sold tests, positivity rates and demographic characteristics of testers.
RESULTS
Five out of 12 identified self-sample test providers could be recommended, versus zero out of eight self-test providers. Self-sample test providers gave complete and correct information on more indicators (67%) compared with self-test providers (38%). In 2015, an estimated 30 000-40 000 self-sample tests were purchased, and 12 000-25 000 self-tests, which is roughly 10%-15% of the total number of STI tests.
CONCLUSION
This evaluation shows that some online self-sample test providers could be put forward as way of STI testing complementing regular testing options. None of the self-test providers were recommended. Regularly evaluating online test providers is advised to improve quality of the information on the websites. Finally, self-testing might not be suited for all populations as most information is provided in written format only.
目的
在线性传播感染（STI）检测可作为家庭医生或 STI 诊所常规护理的补充。在线检测可分为自我检测和自我采样（将样本送至实验室进行诊断）两种类型。在线检测无需与医疗保健专业人员协商即可进行，因此提供的信息对于知情决策至关重要。我们旨在列举荷兰专注于衣原体检测的在线检测服务提供商，使用质量指标评估信息，并了解在线检测在 STI 检测领域中的比例。
方法
我们进行了系统的互联网搜索，以确定在线 STI 检测服务提供商。在其网站上评估了 20 个质量指标；根据重要性（专家意见）对指标得分进行加权。如果检测的灵敏度和特异性高于 95%，并且提供商在阳性结果时包含后续程序，则推荐高分提供商。最后，与提供商联系以询问销售测试的数量、阳性率和测试者的人口统计学特征。
结果
在 8 家自我检测提供商中，有 0 家能够推荐，而在 12 家自我采样检测提供商中，有 5 家可以推荐。自我采样检测提供商提供的完整且正确的信息（67%）多于自我检测提供商（38%）。2015 年，估计有 30000-40000 次自我采样检测和 12000-25000 次自我检测，约占 STI 检测总数的 10%-15%。
结论
该评估表明，一些在线自我采样检测提供商可作为补充常规检测选项的 STI 检测方法。没有推荐任何自我检测提供商。建议定期评估在线检测服务提供商，以提高网站信息质量。最后，自我检测可能不适合所有人群，因为大多数信息仅以书面形式提供。
Zotero 插件