Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
K. Stein, K. Dalziel, Andrew Walker, L. McIntyre, Becky Jenkins, J. Horne, P. Royle, A. Round (2002)
Screening for hepatitis C among injecting drug users and in genitourinary medicine clinics: systematic reviews of effectiveness, modelling study and national survey of current practice.Health technology assessment, 6 31
A. Alberti, L. Benvegnu' (2003)
Management of hepatitis C.Journal of hepatology, 38 Suppl 1
C. Skipper, J. Guy, J. Parkes, P. Roderick, W. Rosenberg (2003)
Evaluation of a prison outreach clinic for the diagnosis and prevention of hepatitis C: implications for the national strategyGut, 52
T. Maden (2000)
Psychiatric Morbidity Among Prisoners in England and WalesBritish Journal of Psychiatry, 176
Galmiche Jp (1998)
French consensus conference on hepatitis C: screening and treatmentGut, 42
P. Marcellin (1999)
EASL International Consensus Conference on Hepatitis CJournal of Hepatology, 31
A. Weild, O. Gill, D. Bennett, S. Livingstone, J. Parry, L. Curran (2000)
Prevalence of HIV, hepatitis B, and hepatitis C antibodies in prisoners in England and Wales: a national survey.Communicable disease and public health, 3 2
Background Prisons are a potential setting for hepatitis C screening. This study describes prisoner flows through such screening for all prisoners entering Dartmoor prison between 1 January 1998 and 30 June 2001.Methods We identified numbers at each step of the screening pathway, from screening to result, referral, biopsy and outcome. We describe the proportions of those screened who were seropositive; seropositives who were confirmed virus-positive; virus-positive cases attending for biopsy; and virus-positive cases eligible for treatment.Results Of 3034 entries into Dartmoor, 12 per cent were screened, with 16 per cent of these seropositive. Seventynine per cent of seropositive prisoners with a polymerase chain reaction result were confirmed virus-positive, and 27 per cent of these prisoners had a biopsy. Two prisoners were eligible for treatment.Conclusions Screening uptake is low. Attrition rates are high, especially at the referral interface between the prison and specialist care. Finally, the yield of individuals eligible for treatment is low, at 7/1000 tested.
Journal of Public Health – Oxford University Press
Published: Dec 1, 2004
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.