Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Objective: To measure the coverage and uptake of systematic postal screening for genital Chlamydia trachomatis and the prevalence of infection in the general population in the United Kingdom. To investigate factors associated with these measures. Design: Cross sectional survey of people randomly selected from general practice registers. Invitation to provide a specimen collected at home. Setting: England. Participants: 19 773 men and women aged 16-39 years invited to participate in screening. Main outcome measures: Coverage and uptake of screening; prevalence of chlamydia. Results: Coverage of chlamydia screening was 73% and was lower in areas with a higher proportion of non-white residents. Uptake in 16-24 year olds was 31.5% and was lower in men, younger adults, and practices in disadvantaged areas. Overall prevalence of chlamydia was 2.8% (95% confidence interval 2.2% to 3.4%) in men and 3.6% (3.1% to 4.9%) in women, but it was higher in people younger than 25 years (men 5.1%; 4.0% to 6.3%; women 6.2%; 5.2% to 7.8%). Prevalence was higher in the subgroup of younger women who were harder to engage in screening. The strongest determinant of chlamydial infection was having one or more new sexual partners in the past year. Conclusions: Postal chlamydia screening was feasible, but coverage was incomplete and uptake was modest. Lower coverage of postal screening in areas with more non-white residents along with poorer uptake in more deprived areas and among women at higher risk of infection could mean that screening leads to wider inequalities in sexual health.

Original publication

DOI

10.1136/bmj.38413.663137.8F

Type

Journal article

Journal

British Medical Journal

Publication Date

23/04/2005

Volume

330

Pages

940 - 942