Region I IPP Infrastructure Updates Advisory Board Meeting June 15, 2010 Boston, MA.
23
Region I IPP Infrastructure Updates Advisory Board Meeting June 15, 2010 Boston, MA
-
Upload
randolf-bradley -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
0
Transcript of Region I IPP Infrastructure Updates Advisory Board Meeting June 15, 2010 Boston, MA.
Region I IPP Infrastructure UpdatesAdvisory Board Meeting
June 15, 2010Boston, MA
Data Overview
• Positivity• Progress towards Regional Goals and
Objectives
Region I Chlamydia Project Clinic Type by Year
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Family Planning
72 85 93 94 113 109 106 107 110 106
STD 15 17 18 13 12 10 12 13 13 10
High School 3 7 26 30 25 22 34 35 35 28
Jails 4 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
DYS 2 7 9 8 12 12 15 15 16 8
Drop-in Clinics
3 4 4 1 1 1 0 0 0
0
Other Clinic Type
1 4 6 3 2 2 2 2 5 30
Total Clinics 100 129 161 153 169 160 173 176 183 186
Total Tested 38,194 46,043 60,322 62,722 60,672 71,280 68,142 64,367 54,447 45,293
Chlamydia Positivity in Region I Family Planning Females by Year
0
2
4
6
8
10
19961997
19981999
20002001
20022003
20042005
20062007
20082009
Region I
% P
ositi
ve
Chlamydia Positivity in Region I Family Planning Females by Year
0
2
4
6
8
10
19961997
19981999
20002001
20022003
20042005
20062007
20082009
Vermont Rhode Island New HampshireMassachusetts Maine ConnecticutRegion I
% P
ositi
ve
Regional Goals and Objectives
Objective 1.1 By 2010, increase CT screening by 10% of
sexually active 15-24 year old women and men. Using 2004 data as the baseline, increase from 28,694 to 32,563 in IPP sites.
Objective 1.1
38718
46153 45398
42040
35983
32666
30000
32500
35000
37500
40000
42500
45000
47500
50000
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
# of Tests
Objective 1.1
9.6 12
21.615 15.2 16
20.818
7.914.7 12.7
6.2
0
20
40
60
80
100
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
%
>25/26 With Risk >25/26 No Risk
% of tests >25/26 ~30%
Regional Goals and Objectives
Objective 2.2 By 2010, no more than 5% of women
more than 25 years of age with no risk factors will be screened in IPP-funded clinics (i.e., 95% will be screened according to regional screening criteria).
0
20
40
60
80
100
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
% w
ith
Ris
k Fa
ctor
s
Connecticut Region I
Connecticut Risk FactorsFamily Planning Clinics, Women, 25+
(Objective 2.2: ≥95% screened)
0
20
40
60
80
100
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
% w
ith R
isk
Fact
ors
Maine Region I
Maine Risk FactorsFamily Planning Clinics, Women, 25+
(Objective 2.2: ≥95% screened)
0
20
40
60
80
100
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
% w
ith R
isk
Fact
ors
Massachusetts Region I
Massachusetts Risk FactorsFamily Planning Clinics, Women, 25+
(Objective 2.2: ≥95% screened)
0
20
40
60
80
100
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
% w
ith R
isk
Fact
ors
New Hampshire Region I
New Hampshire Risk FactorsFamily Planning Clinics, Women, 25+
(Objective 2.2: ≥95% screened)
0
20
40
60
80
100
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
% w
ith R
isk
Fact
ors
Rhode Island Region I
Rhode Island Risk FactorsFamily Planning Clinics, Women, 25+
(Objective 2.2: ≥95% screened)
0
20
40
60
80
100
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
% w
ith
Ris
k Fa
ctor
s
Vermont Region I
Vermont Risk FactorsFamily Planning Clinics, Women, 25+
(Objective 2.2: ≥95% screened)
Infrastructure Performance Measures
• Performance Measure 1
– Screening Coverage Estimate
• Numerator: Number of women screened
• Denominator: Number of women eligible to be screened
Infrastructure Performance Measures
Estimated Screening Coverage by Age Category2005-2009
35.637.4
42.5
45.8
31
34.436.1
40.2
47.4
37.3
40.5
31.632.8
37.7
32
37.3
34.437.3
42.6
33.4
0
10
20
30
40
50
15-19 20-24 >24 Total
20052006200720082009
Infrastructure Performance Measures
– Increased screening in the 15-19 and 20-24 age categories over the past 2 years
• 15-19 screening rose from 35.6% in 2005 to 45.8% in 2007• 20-24 screening rose from 34.4% in 2005 to 47.4% in 2007
– Decreased screening in females over 24 over the past 2 years
• Screening >24 went from 40.5% in 2005 to 37.7% in 2007
– Goals• Increase the number of women age 24 and under by at least 3% • Decrease the number of women age 24+ by at least 3%
Infrastructure Performance Measures
• Performance Measure 2
– Chlamydia Screening Test Utilization
• Proportion of total tests given by age category
– Numerator: Number of women tested by age category
– Denominator: Total number of women tested
Infrastructure Performance Measures
Proportion of Female Tests Utilized, 2005-2009
0.31 0.31 0.3 0.320.31
0.3 0.31 0.31 0.320.37
0.11 0.11 0.110.11
0.08
0.28 0.27 0.280.25
0.23
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
15-19 20-24 24-29 >29
20052006200720082009
Infrastructure Performance Measures
• Overview– Very little change over the past 3 years for all 4 age categories
• Could be a result of budget cuts– Proportion of tests done on women age 29+ is high
• Could be because data is not broken down by those with and without risk factors, CDC recommends testing age 25+ with risk factors
• Goal: Increase the proportion of tests utilized by women between the ages of 15-24 from 0.32 to 0.35 – Decrease the proportion of tests utilized by women 29+ from 0.25 to
0.22
Questions?
0
20
40
60
80
100
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
% w
ith R
isk
Fact
ors
Connecticut Maine Massachusetts New Hampshire Rhode Island Vermont Region I
Risk FactorsFamily Planning Clinics, Women, 25+
(Objective 2.2: ≥95% screened)
