infertility prevention project region i november 15 2010 boston massachusetts
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Infertility Prevention Project Region I November 15, 2010 Boston, Massachusetts

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 39

Infertility Prevention Project Region I November 15, 2010 Boston, Massachusetts - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 251 Views
  • Uploaded on

Infertility Prevention Project Region I November 15, 2010 Boston, Massachusetts. Steven J. Shapiro Infertility Prevention Project Coordinator CDC/NCHHSTP/DSTDP/PTB

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Infertility Prevention Project Region I November 15, 2010 Boston, Massachusetts' - nasia


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
infertility prevention project region i november 15 2010 boston massachusetts
Infertility Prevention ProjectRegion I November 15, 2010Boston, Massachusetts

Steven J. Shapiro

Infertility Prevention Project Coordinator

CDC/NCHHSTP/DSTDP/PTB

Disclaimer: The findings and conclusions in this presentation are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

topics
Topics

National Infertility Prevention Project:

  • CSPS 2011
  • DSTDP Update
  • Health Care Reform
  • Gonorrhea
  • STD Treatment Guidelines
  • “What is IPP”
csps 2011
CSPS 2011
  • Technical Reviews
  • Additional Funds
    • 1.546 million dollars in FY 2010
      • $118K- National Chlamydia Coalition
      • $190K- Infrastructure Shortfall
      • $500K- “The Future of IPP”
      • $730K- Additional Project Area Funds
        • Expansion of CT/GC screening and treatment services
        • Supplement to CSPS 2011
dstdp update
DSTDP Update
  • Personnel Changes
  • Agency Winnable Battles
  • Consultations
  • Guidelines
      • Laboratory and Treatment
  • 2009 STD Surveillance Report
      • Online November 22
health care reform
Health Care Reform

What does this mean for CDC, in general, and STD Prevention specifically?

health care reform1
Health Care Reform
  • Key Issues
    • Performance Improvement
    • Affordable Care Act
    • National HIV/AIDS Strategy
  • “The Future of IPP”
    • Infrastructure-driven evaluation
      • IPP in the project areas
      • Environmental Scan
      • Recommendations for the Future
slide10

George Clooney

accepts the

Bob Hope

Humanitarian Award

For raising Awareness

of Gonococcal

Antimicrobial

Resistance

gonorrhea case rates by sex 1999 2009
Gonorrhea Case Rates by Sex, 1999-2009*

Rate per 100,000

Women

Men

*2009 data are preliminary

gonorrhea case rates by sex 2004 2009
Gonorrhea Case Rates by Sex, 2004-2009

Rate per 100,000

Women

Men

*2009 data are preliminary

gonorrhea case rates by race ethnicity 2004 2009
Gonorrhea Case Rates by Race/Ethnicity, 2004-2009

Rate per 100,000

Black

American Indian

Hispanic

White

Asian

*2009 data are preliminary

gonorrhea case rates by age group 2004 2009
Gonorrhea Case Rates by Age Group, 2004-2009

Rate per 100,000

20-24

15-19

25-29

30-34

*2009 data are preliminary

gonorrhea case rates among black men and women by age 2004 2009
Gonorrhea Case Rates Among Black Men and Women by Age, 2004-2009

Rate per 100,000

Women15-19

Women 20-24

Men 20-24

Men 25-29

*2009 data are preliminary

gonorrhea is not increasing in fact gonorrhea may be decreasing
Gonorrhea is Not Increasing…In Fact, Gonorrhea May Be Decreasing
  • National Job Training Program
    • Decreases 2004-2009
  • NHANES
    • Numbers too small
    • Testing discontinued in 2009 (last cycle gonorrhea included: 2007-2008)
  • Despite…
    • More people being tested for gonorrhea?
    • Targeted screening efforts?
slide18
BUT…..
  • New England
    • Maine 18%
    • Mass 20%
    • NH 47%
    • VT 24%
    • CT 3%
    • RI 11%
  • Others
    • NJ 12%
    • NYC 12%
    • PA 23%
    • MD 9%
    • AK 26%
    • CA 14%
    • HI 8.5%
    • Guam 58%
    • PR 24%
gonorrhea treatment uncomplicated infections of the cervix urethra and rectum
Gonorrhea Treatment: Uncomplicated Infections of the Cervix, Urethra, and Rectum

Cefixime (400mg PO) OR

Ceftriaxone (250mg IM)

PLUS

Azithromycin (1g PO) OR

Doxycycline (100mg PO, 2x/day, 7 days)

(Regardless of whether or not chlamydia is ruled out)

screening among pregnant women chlamydia
Screening Among Pregnant Women: Chlamydia
  • 2010: All pregnant women should be routinely screened for chlamydia during the first prenatal visit.
    • Retest during 3rd trimester: Women aged ≤25 years and those at increased risk
    • If diagnosed with chlamydia in 1st trimester, retest within 3-6 months (preferably 3rd trimester)
  • Changes from 2006: Strengthened and clarified retesting language
screening among pregnant women gonorrhea
Screening Among Pregnant Women: Gonorrhea
  • 2010: All pregnant women at risk for gonorrhea or living in a high-prevalence area should be screened for gonorrhea during the first prenatal visit.
    • Retest during 3rd trimester: Women at continued risk
    • If diagnosed with chlamydia in 1st trimester, retest within 3-6 months (preferably 3rd trimester)
  • Changes from 2006: Strengthened and clarified retesting language
chlamydia screening among young women 2010
Chlamydia Screening Among Young Women: 2010
  • Annual screening of all sexually active women aged ≤25 years is recommended, as is screening of older women with risk factors (e.g., those who have a new sex partner or multiple sex partners). ..USPSTF updated their chlamydia screening guidance and found that the epidemiology of chlamydial infection in the U.S. has not changed since the last review. In issuing recommendations, USPSTF made the decision to alter the age groups used to demonstrate disease incidence (i.e., from persons ≤25 years of age to those aged ≤24 years). CDC has not changed its age cutoff, and thus continues to recommend annual chlamydia screening of sexually active women aged ≤25 years.
chlamydia screening among young women changes from 2006
Chlamydia Screening Among Young Women: Changes from 2006
  • Age cut-off remains the same
  • Addresses USPSTF age change
  • No change to risk factors
  • Added language: Among women, the primary focus of chlamydia screening efforts should be to detect chlamydia and prevent complications, whereas targeted chlamydia screening in men should only be considered when resources permit and do not hinder chlamydia screening efforts in women.
chlamydia screening among men
Chlamydia Screening Among Men
  • 2010: Although evidence is insufficient to recommend routine chlamydia screening in sexually active young men because of several factors (feasibility, efficacy, cost), the screening of sexually active young men should be considered in clinical settings with a high prevalence of chlamydia (e.g., adolescent clinics, correctional facilities, STD clinics).
  • Changes from 2006: Expansion to allow for venue-based male screening
chlamydia retesting women and men
Chlamydia Retesting: Women and Men
  • 2010: Chlamydia-infected women and men should be retested approximately 3 months after treatment…If retesting at 3 months is not possible, clinicians should retest whenever persons next present for medical care in the 12 months following initial treatment.
  • Changed from 2006: Strengthened language
gonorrhea screening among young women
Gonorrhea Screening Among Young Women
  • 2010: The prevalence of gonorrhea varies widely among communities and populations; providers should consider local gonorrhea epidemiology when making screening decisions. Widespread screening is not recommended. However, because infections among women are frequently asymptomatic, targeted screening of young women (i.e., those aged <25 years) at increased risk for infection is a primary component of gonorrhea control in the U.S.
  • Changes from 2006: Emphasis on targeted screening and use of local data, no change in risk factors
gonorrhea retesting women and men
Gonorrhea Retesting: Women and Men
  • 2010: Clinicians should retest patients 3 months after treatment…If patients do not seek medical care for retesting in 3 months, providers are encouraged to test these patients whenever they next seek medical care within the following 12 months.
  • Changed from 2006: Strengthened language
what is ipp
What is IPP
  • Public Health Services Act Section 318A
  • CSPS Project Areas (64)- approx. 28 million annually
    • Based on historical formula
      • Initial distribution (early 90’s): Need and quality
      • Current distribution: Demonstrated and estimated need
    • Within CSPS structure (through 2013)
        • DSTDP POC- Program Consultants
  • Infrastructure (10)- approx. 2.2 million annually
    • Funds awarded through OPA’s regional Family Planning Training Centers (3 year grant cycle, ending 6/30/2011).
        • DSTDP POCs- ESB, PTB, SDMB, LRRB and HSREB
division priorities
Division Priorities
  • IPP
    • Prevention of STD-related infertility
    • Prevention of STD-related adverse outcomes of pregnancy
    • Strengthen STD prevention capacity and infrastructure
    • Address health disparities
project areas
Project Areas
  • Goal:
    • Provide CT/GC screening and treatment services for at-risk women and their sex partners
      • Use of funds varies depending on project area
project areas1
Project Areas
  • Accomplishments:
    • 09-0902 CSPS
      • “Use your data”
      • 3% CT positivity threshold established
      • Flexibility regarding “50% rule”
      • Continued expansion of screening and treatment services into non-FP/STD facilities
      • Increasing number of tests reported
      • Regional gonorrhea meetings: Target gonorrhea screening
project areas2
Project Areas
  • Strengths
    • Well-established partnership between STD, FP, labs
      • Available forum to address program issues
    • Programmatic evaluations conducted at low cost
    • Leadership can look beyond categorical funding
  • Weaknesses
    • Epi support varies from non-existent to extensive
    • Lack of publication/dissemination of special projects
    • Leadership is bound by categorical funding and history
    • Disease burden is larger than available resources
infrastructure
Infrastructure
  • Goal:
    • Support and improve the ability of public health departments to implement IPP activities and promote interventions that prevent STD-related infertility
  • Activities
    • Administration
    • Coordination
    • Communication
    • Prevalence monitoring and data management
    • Education and program promotion
    • Enhanced activities
    • Independent laboratory consultant
infrastructure accomplishments
Infrastructure - Accomplishments
  • Establishment of infrastructure performance measures
      • Screening coverage estimates
      • Test utilization by age
  • Establishment of pan-regional grant objectives
      • Native American and Alaskan Native health care delivery systems
      • Development of pregnancy-test only epi profiles
  • Data standardization
  • De-emphasis of regional screening criteria
  • Epi-methods workgroup and process
  • Enhancement of IHS Partnership
  • Support for regional GC meetings
  • Increased submission and acceptance of conference abstracts
infrastructure1
Infrastructure
  • Small Projects (examples)
      • Pacific Island assessments
      • Collaboration with HMOs: Chlamydia trends and PID surveillance [ESB]
      • Provider adherence to screening criteria assessment
      • Adolescent confidentiality
      • EPT support
      • Cross-regional data analysis
      • Rescreening assessment
      • Concurrency study
      • Laboratory studies
      • Jail screenings [HSREB]
infrastructure2
Infrastructure
  • Strengths
    • Regions provide recognized leadership on a variety of issues
    • Partner with branches other than PTB
    • Extensive representation on National Chlamydia Coalition (NCC)
    • Independence fosters flexibility and critical thinking
    • Available funding mechanism
    • Partnership recognized as a successful model
  • Weaknesses
    • Unable or unwilling to publish work
    • Ten distinct regional partners with varying levels of capacity
ad