html5-img
1 / 19

Syphilis Elimination: Reasons for Hope?

Syphilis Elimination: Reasons for Hope?. Kevin O’Connor DSTDP October 7, 2010. Topics. Syphilis in the South CSPS DSTDP efforts with health departments Reasons for hope. Charting the US P&S Syphilis Epidemic. 2000. 2003. 2005. 2008. Rates per 100K Pop. < .2/100K. >4/100K.

andres
Download Presentation

Syphilis Elimination: Reasons for Hope?

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Syphilis Elimination:Reasons for Hope? Kevin O’Connor DSTDP October 7, 2010

  2. Topics Syphilis in the South CSPS DSTDP efforts with health departments Reasons for hope

  3. Charting the US P&S Syphilis Epidemic 2000 2003 2005 2008 Rates per 100K Pop <.2/100K >4/100K .21-4/100K

  4. N Carolina:Syphilis Rates by Gender, 2005-2009 84%↑ 88%↑ Rate ratios: 2.4 2.6 3.0 3.6 3.6 Communicable Disease Surveillance Unit

  5. N Carolina:Co-morbidity (early syphilis & HIV)

  6. Georgia P&S Syphilis by Race 2005-2009

  7. Tennessee: HIV Co-Infection in Syphilis Cases

  8. Southern Syphilis Summary Significant changes in syphilis epidemiology: Shift from heterosexual to MSM Rapid increase in HIV co-infection among MSM Increasing among young African American MSM Conclusion – SE should be part of a comprehensive STD/HIV prevention effort for MSM

  9. CSPS New Directions Use data to drive program Identify, then address health disparities Added emphasis on program evaluation → improvement Performance Measures (PM) Program Improvement Plans (PIP) Evidence Based Action Plans (EBAP) Are SE interventions working? Are they effective? Consider potential strategies for program improvements How well are interventions targeted towards at risk populations?

  10. Current SE Activities Surveillance - ID populations at risk Partner Services Internet Partner Services (IPS) Management and Oversight: clear standards and expectations, supervisory review, engagement and support by managers DIS embedded in HIV Care; gay-friendly clinics DIS liaisons with key agencies to develop strong relationships Community Engagement - community coalitions focusing on STD/HIV, media campaigns, STD in HIV CPG, Online outreach STDP as part of HIVP services for MSM Targeted Screening - based on epi/surveillance ROUTINE STD screening in HIV Care Ensure access to clinical services -

  11. SE Activities Start Stop Improve Enhance Target Collaborate

  12. DSTDP Efforts

  13. DSTDP Efforts to Address Syphilis, 2009-2010 • 9 Program Improvement Webinars on SE topics • “Syphilis in the South” webinar • CDC Field team deployed to outbreak in Cincinnati, Ohio (Aug/Sept. 2010); AZ (2009); Houston (2008) • Epi-Aids: Texarkana, Arkansas; Phoenix, Arizona • Rapid Ethnographic Assessments in Phoenix, Arizona and North Carolina • Program Performance Site visits (PPSV): Virginia, Tennessee, Mississippi, New Jersey, California (San Diego). Outcome – over 82 recommendations for syphilis –related program improvement made across all program domains (Surveillance, PS, Medical/lab Services, Evaluation, etc.) Priority focus on HIV care providers in areas with significant MSM morbidity • Return PPSV to Puerto Rico and Louisiana (New Orleans, Shreveport). 2010

  14. DSTDP Efforts to Address Syphilis, 2009-2010 • Comprehensive program review in Albuquerque, New Mexico – significant focus on syphilis prevention and control activities. • Focus on EBAPs /other PM data – are strategies implemented effectively ? Are at-risk targeted? Are ineffective/inefficient strategies modified or stopped? • Best Practices Initiative – over 50 potential BP related to syphilis prevention and control submitted. Goal is to link those in need with those who have demonstrated success. • Congenital Syphilis – PTB/ESB ID HMAs; PCs assess current status of CS efforts in HMAs with CS or high female morbidity. PCs are working with project areas on CS program improvement, where needed. • IPS TA • Individual TA for project areas

  15. Reasons for Hope

  16. Reasons for Hope Epi • ‘Signs of declines’ in provisional surveillance data from SE: TX, NYC, AL, & SF …although increases are occurring in OH, Chicago, WA, and KY Enhanced Efforts PS • Strengthened procedures, supervisions, and oversight: KY • Relocation of DIS: L.A. • IPS: AL, AZ, SF, MA, MO, NC, & PR. Many other areas Screening • ROUTINE STD screening in HIV Care • Epi-based TARGETED screening (inc. collaboratively w/ HIVP)

  17. Thoughts on STDs & HIV STDs among MSM is an HIV Prevention issue STDP should be an core element of MSM HIVP Rectal STDs are a strong predictor of HIV sero-conversion HIV-/+ MSM with an STD should receive prompt HIVP services Sexually active MSM should be routinely screened for STDs (blood test for syphilis, rectal screen for CT/GC) HIV Care providers should routinely screen for STDs

  18. Distribution of 2007 & Projected 2008 SEE Funding* by Project Areas in Rank Order of P&S Morbidity** 2007 Mean Investment = $477,079.93 2008 Mean Investment = $463,414.63 *Total 2007 SEE funding = $19,083,197. 2008 Projected SEE Funding based on $19,000,000. **P&S Morbidity is an average of P&S Cases for 2005 and 2006

  19. Proposed SEE Funding Formula For HMAs Funding is based on 2 components: • a base of $150,000; and • a proportion of remaining available funds based on the % of reported P&S cases for all HMAs for the two prior years for which data are available For post-HMAs Funding will include base funding for two years during the “post-HMA” transition period.

More Related