Jm Chow1, J. Guo
1, M. Bradsberry
2, H. Thiel de Bocanegra
2, S. Steinberg
3, and G. Bolan
4. (1) Sexually Transmitted Disease Control Branch, California Department of Health Services, 850 Marina Bay Parkway, Building P, Second Floor, Richmond, CA, USA, (2) Bixby Center for Reproductive Health Research and Policy, University of CA, San Francisco, 1615 Capitol Ave, P.O. Box 997413, MS 8400, Sacramento, CA, USA, (3) Maternal, Child, Adolescent Health/Office of Family Planning, California Department of Health Services, 1615 Capitol Avenue, MS 8300, P.O. Box 997420, Sacramento, CA, USA, (4) STD Control Branch, CA Department of Health Services, 850 Marina Bay Parkway, Bldg. P, 2nd Floor, Richmond, CA, USA
Background:
National guidelines recommend annually chlamydia screening for women age <=5 years. However, reports of screening coverage suggest that most young women are not being screened and quality improvement interventions are needed.
Objective:
To evaluate a targeted provider intervention strategy to improve chlamydia screening rates among family planning providers.
Method:
Paid claims data from laboratories and clinician providers serving female clients in the Family PACT (Planning, Access, Care, Treatment) program were used to calculate the provider-specific proportion of female clients age 15-25 years served in FY01/02 that were screened for chlamydia. Letters with specific provider screening results and targeted messages based on low (<50%), medium (50-79%), and high (>80%) screening rates were mailed in September 2003 to providers who served >=100 female clients in this age group. Screening rate increases were compared between the month of mailing and 4 months post-mailing by initial screening performance category.
Result:
Females age 15-25 years (n=567,284) were screened for chlamydia by 394 low screeners, 416 medium screeners, and 56 high screeners. 65% of low screeners had at least a 5% increase in screening over baseline as compared with 37% of medium screeners and 9% of high screeners. Median % relative increase over baseline screening was 22% for low screeners as compared with 2% for medium screeners and
-7% for high screeners. Private sector low screeners had a significantly higher mean screening rate (61%) than public sector low screeners (55%) at 4 months post-mailing (p=0.01).
Conclusion:
Mailed targeted provider feedback regarding chlamydia screening significantly improved screening rates among the lowest performing providers.
Implications:
Regularly mailed data and screening messages in the form of provider profiles may be effective for improving performance among providers with low chlamydia screening rates.