Start | Browse by Day | Author Index

THP 18 Measuring the Impact of School-Based STD Screening, Washington, DC, 2013-2014

Thursday, September 22, 2016
Galleria Exhibit Hall
Bruce W. Furness, MD, MPH1, Daniel R. Newman, MA2, Bethany Foster, MPH3, Kenya Troutman, MPH4, Veronica Urquilla, MSW5, Travis Gayles, MD, PhD3 and Michael Kharfen, BA6, 1DC DOH - HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis, STD and TB Administration, Division of STD/TB Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, DSTDP, Washington, DC, 2Epidemiology and Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, 3HAHSTA, Washington, DC, 4HAHSTA, HAHSTA, Washington, DC, 5HAHSTA, Washignton, DC, 6HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis, STD and TB Administration, DC Department of Health, Washington, DC

Background: School-based STD screening has been shown to be acceptable, highly cost-effective (relative to other commonly accepted interventions), and (with repeated screening and treatment) associated with declines in chlamydia prevalence among adolescent males.

Methods: The objective of this study was to measure the impact of our School-based STD Screening Program (SBSP) presentation on the knowledge of participants.  During the 2013/2014 academic year, a convenience sample of youth in 10 high schools completed pre- and post-surveys (6 true/false questions) focusing on the main take home messages in the 20-minute interactive presentation.  Frequencies and paired-comparison t-tests were run in SAS version 9.3.

Results: Surveys were given to 904 students, of which 574 (63%) had complete matched pre- and post- responses.  Overall, 235 (41%) gained knowledge (range, 19-58%) and only 30 (5%) lost knowledge (range, 0-10%).  There was a significant improvement in correct responses when comparing post- to pre-surveys overall (p<0.0001), for each individual question, and for each individual high school except one.  Question #3 (“I know where to get tested and treated for STDs in DC.”) showed the most improvement (p<0.0001), question #4 (“I can have an STD and not have any symptoms.”) was the second most improved (p<0.0001), and question #2 (“I can get tested for STDs in DC for free.”) showed the least improvement (p=0.0338), but it also had the highest percentage of pre-survey correct responses.

Conclusions: Assessing impact of school-based STD screening can be arduous.  This study showed an overall increase in knowledge among adolescents participating in our SBSP.  Further evaluation needs to be done to assess whether this short-term increase in knowledge is sustainable – especially among those who are diagnosed and treated for an STD – and whether or not it actually normalizes routine STD/HIV screening among this vulnerable sub-population.

See more of: Poster Session Two
See more of: Oral and Poster
<< Previous Abstract | Next Abstract >>