You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Correspondence
STI self-testing: ensuring representation and outreach to teens and adolescents in expanded approaches
  1. Michael E DeWitt1,2,3,
  2. Vonda Pabon3,
  3. Andrea Vasquez3,
  4. Jennifer J Wenner1,3,
  5. Candice J McNeil1,3
  1. 1 Department of Medicine, Section on Infectious Diseases, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA
  2. 2 Department of Biology, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA
  3. 3 North Carolina Strengthening the United States Response to Resistant Gonorrhea (SURRG), Guilford County Department of Public Health, Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
  1. Correspondence to Michael E DeWitt, Department of Medicine, Section on Infectious Diseases, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA; medewitt{at}wakehealth.edu

Abstract

In our correspondence, we describe the results from a quality improvement survey in a sexual health clinic in North Carolina regarding attitudes and perceptions among adolescents and providers regarding specimen self-collection. We find that adolescents have high levels of acceptability for self-collection and confidence in their ability to self-collection; however, providers expressed hesitation regarding the ability of adolescents to self-collection. Our study shows that while self-collection may provide a way to expand testing access to difficult-to-reach populations, we must ensure that providers are confident in the corresponding results.

  • public health
  • gonorrhea
  • diagnostic techniques and procedures
  • epidemiology

https://doi.org/10.1136/sextrans-2023-056017

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Handling editor Anna Maria Geretti

    • Contributors MED was responsible for data analysis, data interpretation, manuscript preparation and review. AV was responsible for survey design, survey distribution and manuscript review. VP was responsible for survey design, survey distribution and manuscript review. JJW was responsible for data interpretation and manuscript review. CJM was responsible for study concept, survey design, data interpretation, manuscript preparation and review. MD and CJM had direct access to and verified the underlying data reported in the manuscript.

    • Funding Funding for the Strengthening the U.S. Response to Resistant Gonorrhea activities described in this article was supported with federal Antibiotic Resistance Initiative funding and administered through the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Epidemiology and Laboratory Capacity for the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases (ELC) Cooperative Agreement Grant Award Number CK19-1904. The authors gratefully acknowledge use of REDCap supported by the Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science Institute (WF CTSI), funded by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health, through Grant Award Number UL1TR001420. The findings and conclusions of this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the CDC. Funders had no role in study design; collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in writing the report; and in the decision to submit this correspondence for publication.

    • Competing interests CJM has received grants, contracts and/or participated in clinical trials with funding from BINX, Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority/GlaxoSmithKline, Becton Dickinson, United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Cepheid, Gilead, Hologic, Lupin, National Association of County and City Health Officials, and National Institutes of Health, paid to her employer. MD, AV and JW acknowledge support from the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, paid to their employer.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.