Search results

The three Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania) are among the European Union countries with the highest incidence and mortality rates for cervical cancer. In order to tackle this public health challenge, there is an urgent need to implement more advanced and effective methods in cervical cancer prevention in Baltic countries.Nationwide cervical cancer screening programs in the Baltic States commenced in 2004–2009. While the organized screening programs in these countries differ in some relevant details (target age groups, screening interval), the underlying principles and problems, barriers are universal. However, the outcomes of present screening programs are unsatisfactory. In addition, universal screening programs are extremely costly. There is a potential need for more intelligent and personalized cervical cancer screening program. In 2019 the project"Towards elimination of cervical cancer: intelligent and personalized solutions for cancer screening"(2020–2023) was developed with the main objective – to develop improved and personalized cancer screening methods within a sustainable health care system.It is expected, that more sophisticated cervical cancer screening model will be implemented in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, and will have a positive impact to epidemiology of cervical cancer and public health in general.

Background: In 2012, the levels of chlamydia control activities including primary prevention, effective case management with partner management and surveillance were assessed in 2012 across countries in the European Union and European Economic Area (EU/EEA), on initiative of the European Centre for Disease Control (ECDC) survey, and the findings were compared with those from a similar survey in 2007. Methods: Experts in the 30 EU/EEA countries were invited to respond to an online questionnaire; 28 countries responded, of which 25 participated in both the 2007 and 2012 surveys. Analyses focused on 13 indicators of chlamydia prevention and control activities; countries were assigned to one of five categories of chlamydia control. Results: In 2012, more countries than in 2007 reported availability of national chlamydia case management guidelines (80% vs. 68%), opportunistic chlamydia testing (68% vs. 44%) and consistent use of nucleic acid amplification tests (64% vs. 36%). The number of countries reporting having a national sexually transmitted infection control strategy or a surveillance system for chlamydia did not change notably. In 2012, most countries (18/25, 72%) had implemented primary prevention activities and case management guidelines addressing partner management, compared with 44% (11/25) of countries in 2007. Conclusion: Overall, chlamydia control activities in EU/EEA countries strengthened between 2007 and 2012. Several countries still need to develop essential chlamydia control activities, whereas others may strengthen implementation and monitoring of existing activities.