Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-fvjsw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T09:56:26.188Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of a Diagnostic Order Set on Sexually-Transmitted Infection Co-Testing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 June 2026

Jon Johannesson
Affiliation:
Duke University Hospital
Mary Townsend
Affiliation:
Durham VA Medical Center
Christopher Shoff
Affiliation:
Durham Veterans Affairs Healthcare System
Reinaldo Perez
Affiliation:
Durham VA Medical Center

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Background: National guidelines recommend that anyone diagnosed with a sexually transmitted infection (STI) be tested for other STIs. However, in the majority of cases, appropriate STI co-testing is not performed. Additionally, STI diagnosis is often a missed opportunity for referral for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Order sets can be an effective tool within electronic medical records (EMR) to standardize diagnostic and therapeutic pathways. We sought to improve STI co-testing, PrEP referrals, and antimicrobial management through the implementation of a diagnostic and treatment order set within the Durham VA Health Care System (DVAHCS). Methods: An STI order set prompting co-testing was implemented in September of 2024 across DVAHCS. STI co-testing rates were analyzed one year pre- and post-implementation. Interrupted time series (ITS) analysis was performed using Gaussian regression to evaluate the effect of order set implementation for both co-testing of gonorrhea, chlamydia and syphilis (GCS) and additional cotesting for HIV (total STI). New starts and overall administration of HIV PrEP and order set utilization for therapeutics were analyzed using incidence rate ratios (IRRs) comparing incidence rates pre- and post-implementation. Result: The GCS cotesting IRR was 0.991 (p p p p p p p p p = 0.582). (Figure 3) The treatment order set was used on average 24.6% of the time after implementation. (Figure 4) Conclusion: The implementation of a STI co-testing order set did not change the rate of co-testing for chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis and HIV. An accompanying treatment order set was used to a significant degree, although in a minority of cases. There was no significant change in the initiation of PrEP after implementation of the order set as compared to prior. Our study was limited by small numbers of incident STI diagnoses. Further research is warranted to understand the optimal ways towards increasing recommended testing patterns and how tools within EMRs can assist with this goal.

A table comparing incident diagnoses, STI cotesting, HIV cotesting, and full cotesting percentages across different quarters.

A table comparing Chlamydia, gonorrhea, and total STI cotesting rates across control and intervention dates.

A table showing the usage of antibiotics and order sets across different quarters.

A table comparing the number of unique starts, total eligible individuals, those on PrEP, those not on PrEP, and the percentage on PrEP across different quarters from 2023 to 2025.

Information

Type
Diagnostic Stewardship
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America