Antenatal sexually transmitted infection screening in private and indigent clinics in a community hospital system




Objective


To determine whether clinics that serve indigent patients demonstrate equal compliance with sexually transmitted infection testing guidelines when compared with private clinics.


Study Design


One hundred eighty-three women were divided into cohorts based on whether they received prenatal care at a private or indigent clinic. Timing of required antenatal sexually transmitted infection screening was collected for 8 tests and compliance scores were calculated. Primary outcome was average compliance score compared between clinic types. Secondary outcomes included disease-specific compliance and percent of perfect compliance at different office types.


Results


Compliance was found to be different between clinic types ( P = .023). Indigent clinics had the same median with slightly higher inner-quartile range than private clinics (7 [7–8], 7 [7–7]). Indigent clinics had higher mean compliance scores (7.1 vs 6.9) and a greater percentage of patients demonstrating perfect compliance (42% vs 14%, P < .001).


Conclusion


Clinics serving indigent patient populations had a higher compliance with required testing compared to private clinics. HIV testing in the third trimester remains the greatest need for improvement for all practice types.


Sexually transmitted diseases are known to cause significant morbidity to infected patients, especially women. Many of these diseases pose a significant risk to the fetus and neonate of infected obstetric patients. Congenital infection with syphilis is common in affected mothers and can lead to a variety of birth defects or even neonatal death. Given that both the severity of illness and success of treatment in the neonate depends largely on the timing and adequacy of maternal identification and treatment, early and appropriate maternal screening is key in minimizing the transplacental or direct-contact transmission of disease.


Other, more common infections likewise represent a potential source of significant neonatal morbidity. It has been well established that untreated maternal chlamydia or gonorrhea infection at time of delivery frequently leads to neonatal infection in the form of a severe conjunctivitis, pneumonia, or neonatal sepsis. HIV infection carries with it significant potential for mortality, long-term morbidity, and social cost if not diagnosed in pregnancy. Early intervention in pregnancy can lower vertical transmission dramatically.


The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommends screening for each of these infections during the antenatal period. In the Guidelines for Perinatal Care , ACOG endorses screening for syphilis, chlamydia, hepatitis B virus, and HIV in the first trimester, followed by rescreening in the third trimester for chlamydia, HIV, and syphilis for “high-risk” populations. Some factors that are deemed “high-risk” include low socioeconomic status, age less than 25 years, African-American race, early age at coitarche, and both current and lifetime number of sexual partners. In a strong public health push, many states have reinforced these suggestions with legal mandates. In the state of North Carolina, prenatal care providers are required to test for syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia at a woman’s first prenatal visit, and to retest for syphilis in the third trimester and again at time of delivery; those women less than 25 years of age or who are deemed to be at “high-risk” for gonorrhea or chlamydia should be retested in the third trimester or at delivery. Patients are also required to be tested for hepatitis B virus at the first visit, unless they are known to be positive for the virus at time of initial prenatal testing. In addition, the state of North Carolina requires that each obstetric patient be screened for HIV at the first prenatal visit and in the third trimester unless she specifically refuses testing. North Carolina law further stipulates that at time of delivery a patient be tested for HIV regardless of consent if the maternal HIV status is not known. Thus, to comply with these state mandated testing regimens, prenatal care providers are required to screen for 5 potential sexually transmitted infections (STIs) in the first trimester, 2 STIs in the third trimester, 1 at time of delivery, and potentially 2 more in the third trimester in “at risk” individuals.


The onus thus falls on the shoulders of the practitioner providing prenatal care to comply with these mandates. In a survey of prenatal care providers across the state, Troccolli et al found that the majority of providers recommended testing to all obstetric patients, but did discover that the level of encouragement was related to the practitioner’s perceived patient risk. However, in a survey given to patients across the country, approximately 30% of women surveyed reported that they had not been offered testing for HIV during their pregnancy. Another study that evaluated prenatal screening compliance for both HIV and syphilis in commercially insured patients in 1999 revealed that less than two-thirds of patients were screened for syphilis and only one-third for HIV. Similarly, routine annual screening for chlamydia is recommended for all sexually active women 25 years of age and younger. However, data from the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) from 2000-2008 reveal that less than 60% of Medicaid and less than 50% of commercially insured patients were tested; by 2008 in North Carolina, less than 37% of women in this age bracket were screened. As the HEDIS data and Troccolli study suggest, perhaps some of these discrepancies in STI screening are based on risk stratification at the level of the individual provider. This then poses the question of whether compliance with recommended and mandated screening algorithms is greater in practices that deal with more at-risk populations. If such a difference were to be found, that information could then be used for process improvement at the level of the specific practices in question, but also could be extrapolated to other practices with similar patient populations.


Materials and Methods


We conducted a retrospective cohort study that was approved by the Carolinas Medical Center Institutional Review Board (IRB) prior to the start of data collection.


Study population


The study population included pregnant women who presented for delivery at Carolinas Medical Center (CMC) in Charlotte, NC within a 1-month period. Patients were eligible for participation in the study if they obtained prenatal care within a CMC-affiliated medical practice, if they transferred their care to a CMC-affiliated practice during pregnancy and had early prenatal records available for review, and if they delivered within the specified time frame. Patients were excluded from the study if they did not receive care from a CMC-affiliated practice and their records were incomplete or unavailable for review, if they presented for their first prenatal visit after 20 weeks’ gestational age without earlier records available, if they had limited prenatal care, or if they delivered before 36 weeks’ gestational age.


Recruitment


Participants were identified by a retrospective review of the delivery records at Carolinas Medical Center within a 1-month time frame. Patients were subsequently divided into 2 cohorts: patients who obtained prenatal care at practices primarily treating privately insured patients, and those who obtained care at clinics primarily treating indigent and uninsured patients. Patient charts within the electronic medical record were then examined and nonidentifying data were collected and logged into a database developed for this project. Waiver of authorization and informed consent was granted by the IRB before the start of data collection. As such, informed consent was not obtained from individual participants since all data were previously collected in accordance with standard of care for prenatal treatment; patient-specific identifiers were removed from study records immediately on data entry and were replaced with generic, nonidentifying ID numbers. The timing of antenatal testing was recorded for a total of 10 data points:




  • Less than 20 weeks: gonorrhea, chlamydia, syphilis, HIV, and hepatitis B



  • Greater than 20 weeks: gonorrhea, chlamydia, syphilis, and HIV



  • Time of delivery: syphilis



HIV status at time of delivery was also documented within the database.


Outcomes


Our primary outcome was measured as an average compliance score compared between clinics that primarily serve privately insured patients and those that primarily serve indigent and uninsured patients. This compliance was demonstrated as a number out of a maximum possible score of 8, with 8 representing perfect compliance. This scoring system was calculated by adding 1 point for each completed test of the 8 STI screens recommended for all patients throughout pregnancy. These 8 screens include gonorrhea, chlamydia, hepatitis B virus, HIV, and syphilis at the first prenatal visit in the first trimester, syphilis and HIV again in the late second or early third trimester, and syphilis again at presentation for delivery. Scores were calculated for every patient within each practice, and then overall practice compliance was derived from these individual scores.


Secondary outcomes include disease-specific compliance scores across all practice types, as well as percentages of perfect compliance at different practice types.


Statistical analysis


Statistical analysis of continuous variables was performed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Kruskal-Wallis test for nonparametric data. The χ 2 test for association was used on dichotomous variables. P values < .05 were considered to be statistically significant. All analyses were conducted in SAS software (version 9.2; SAS Institute, Cary, NC).




Results


Two hundred forty-five patients were identified as potential candidates for the study, of which 62 were excluded. Of those excluded, 67% of the patients either had late presentation for or limited prenatal care and 7% had no prenatal care. Another 12% were excluded for preterm delivery and 10% for transfer of care with limited records. In sum, a total of 183 patients were included and evaluated, with 104 individuals obtaining care at private clinics and 79 women from indigent clinics (56.8% and 43.2%, respectively). Of those patients being seen at indigent/community clinics, 57 were seen at obstetric/gynecologic offices and 32 at family practice offices. All the patients from private clinics were seen at obstetric/gynecologic offices. The demographic characteristics of the 2 cohorts are listed in the Table .



TABLE

Patient demographics




















































Demographic Private Community
Race
African-American 11 31
Caucasian 72 9
Hispanic 2 32
Other 19 7
Insurance status
Private 94 6
Medicaid 3 46
Self-pay 1 16
Other 6 11
Average age 32.1 27.3

Yancey. Antenatal STI screening in a community hospital system. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012.


Both private and community clinics demonstrated a median compliance score of 7, with inner-quartile ranges of 7–8 for community clinics and 7–7 for private clinics. The Wilcoxon test was found to be significant ( P = .023) ( Figure 1 , A). The mean compliance scores of 6.9 and 7.1 are also presented for informational purposes only ( Figure 1 , A). Within the community clinics, scores differed between medical specialties. Of the 3 family practice clinics, all had median compliance scores of 7; of the 2 obstetric/gynecologic practices, Obstetrics Practice 1 had a median score of 8 and Obstetrics Practice 2 a score of 7 (overall Kruskal-Wallis P < .001) ( Figure 1 , B). In examining the overall rate of perfect compliance, which indicates that a single patient was screened for all 8 STIs required in pregnancy, private clinics demonstrated perfect compliance with 14% of patients and community clinics did so with 42% of patients ( P < .001) ( Figure 2 ) . Obstetrics Practice 1 alone had 82% perfect compliance, as compared with 16% of perfect compliance over all other practices within both private and community cohorts ( P < .001).


May 15, 2017 | Posted by in GYNECOLOGY | Comments Off on Antenatal sexually transmitted infection screening in private and indigent clinics in a community hospital system

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access