| Literature DB >> 23841066 |
Rohit Chawla1, Preena Bhalla, Sanjim Chadha, Sujatha Grover, Suneela Garg.
Abstract
Although Nugent's criterion is considered as the gold standard for the diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis (BV), the method requires an experienced slide reader and considerable time and skill. In this study, we compared the method of Hay and Ison with Nugent's scoring criteria. Vaginal specimens were collected from a total of 213 women, presenting with or without the symptoms of vaginitis. Diagnosis of BV was done using Nugent' and Hay's method. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values for positive and negative test were calculated for Hay's method using Nugent's method as the gold standard. We diagnosed 70 cases (32.86%) of BV by Nugent's method and 87 (40.85%) cases by the Hay's method. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive value of positive result, predictive value of negative result, and Kappa value when evaluating Hay's criteria using Nugent's criteria as the gold standard were ≥97.2%, ≥88.1%, ≥80.4%, ≥97.1%, and ≥0.830, respectively, when Hay's grade II and/or Nugent's intermediate score were considered either as negative or positive or excluded. Using Nugent score for the intermediate group is the most difficult. Hay's method shows good agreement with the gold standard method of Nugent et al. and can be used as an alternative to Nugent's criteria in busy tertiary care hospitals.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23841066 PMCID: PMC3697286 DOI: 10.1155/2013/365194
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
The Hay/Ison classification.
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
| Normal (group 1) | Many | Few |
| Intermediate (group 2) | Equal amount | Equal amount |
| BV (group 3) | Few | Many |
Comparison of Hay's classification system with Nugent's scoring system for diagnosis of BV in study subjects (n = 213).
| Hay's grading | Nugent's score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal | Intermediate | Positive | Total | |
| I | 100 | 3* | 0 | 103 (48.4) |
| II | 7** | 16 | 0 | 23 (10.8) |
| III | 0 | 17*** | 70 | 87 (40.8) |
|
| ||||
| Total | 107 (50.2) | 36 (16.9) | 70 (32.9) | 213 |
*Two had Nugent's score of 4, and 1 had Nugent's score of 5.
**All 7 had Nugent's score of 3.
***Nine had Nugent's score of 6, four had Nugent's score of 5, and four had Nugent's score of 4.
Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of Hay's classification system using Nugent's score as the gold standard for the diagnosis of BV in study subjects.
| 1 | 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity (%) | 100 | 97.2 |
| Specificity (%) | 88.1 | 93.4 |
| Predictive value of positive result (%) | 80.4 | 93.7 |
| Predictive value of negative result (%) | 100 | 97.1 |
| Kappa | 0.830 | 0.906 |
(1) Hay's: grade I = negative; grade II = negative; grade III = positive, Nugent's: score 0–3 = negative; score 4–6 = negative; score 7–10 = positive.
(2) Hay's: grade I = negative; grade II = positive; grade III = positive, Nugent's: score 0–3 = negative; score 4–6 = positive; score 7–10 = positive.
Presence of clue cells in relation to Nugent's scoring system and Hay's classification system.
|
| Clue cells |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | Negative | |||
| Nugent's score | ||||
| 7–10 | 70 | 49 | 21 | <0.001 |
| 4–6 | 36 | 2 | 34 | 164.5 |
| 0–3 | 107 | 0 | 107 | |
|
| ||||
| Hay's score | ||||
| III | 87 | 50 | 37 | <0.001 |
| II | 23 | 1 | 22 | 168.9 |
| I | 103 | 0 | 103 | |
Interobserver agreement (Kappa value)*.
| Inter-observer agreement | Nugent's method | BV by Hay's | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BV | Normal | Grade I | Grade III | |
| Between PB and RC | 0.82 | 0.75 | 0.91 | 0.88 |
| Between PB and SG | 0.67 | 0.63 | 0.72 | 0.76 |
*Intermediate scores in Nugent's and grade II in Hay's and Ison's classification have been excluded for calculating interobserver agreement.