Zemenu Mengistie1, Yimtubezinash Woldeamanuel2, Daniel Asrat2, Mahlet Yigeremu3. 1. Faculty, Department of Biomedical Science, College of Health Sciences, Mizan Tepi University , P.O. Box 260, Mizan, Ethiopia . 2. Faculty, Department of Medical Microbiology, Immunology and Parasitology, Faculty of Medicine, Addis Ababa University , P.O. Box 9086, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia . 3. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Addis Ababa University , P.O. Box 9086, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia .
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bacterial Vaginosis (BV) is characterized by an increased thin homogenous white vaginal discharge accompanied by fishy odour and increased vaginal pH. It is associated with different gynecologic and poor obstetric outcome. Bacterial vaginosis can be easily diagnosed by combination of two Amsel's criteria. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of Amsel's criteria individually or in combination of two for the clinical diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis among pregnant women in Ethiopia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this crosssectional study 252 pregnant women were screened for bacterial vaginosis. Vaginal swabs were collected for pH determination, saline wet mount microscopic examination to detect clue cells, KOH preparation for whiff test and Gram-stain evaluation of vaginal flora for diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis by Nugent scoring system. Accuracy of clinical diagnosis using individual and two of Amsel's criteria was evaluated. RESULTS: The prevalence of BV was 18.3% by Amsel's two of three criteria and 19.4% Gram by Nugent's methods. Comparing with Nugent scoring methods, the clinical diagnosis by Amsel's criteria had sensitivity of 85.7%, specificity of 98%. The most sensitive and specific individual Amsel's criterion was clue cells. Amsel's criteria with the lowest sensitivity and specificity were whiff test and vaginal pH respectively. Combination of clue cells with vaginal pH test were the highest in sensitive while whiff test with clue cells were the highest in specificity than the other combined two Amsel's criteria. CONCLUSION: Amsel's criteria diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis can be simplified by using a combination of the two criteria, vaginal pH and clue cells, in settings where time or Gram staining is not available.
BACKGROUND:Bacterial Vaginosis (BV) is characterized by an increased thin homogenous white vaginal discharge accompanied by fishy odour and increased vaginal pH. It is associated with different gynecologic and poor obstetric outcome. Bacterial vaginosis can be easily diagnosed by combination of two Amsel's criteria. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of Amsel's criteria individually or in combination of two for the clinical diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis among pregnant women in Ethiopia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this crosssectional study 252 pregnant women were screened for bacterial vaginosis. Vaginal swabs were collected for pH determination, saline wet mount microscopic examination to detect clue cells, KOH preparation for whiff test and Gram-stain evaluation of vaginal flora for diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis by Nugent scoring system. Accuracy of clinical diagnosis using individual and two of Amsel's criteria was evaluated. RESULTS: The prevalence of BV was 18.3% by Amsel's two of three criteria and 19.4% Gram by Nugent's methods. Comparing with Nugent scoring methods, the clinical diagnosis by Amsel's criteria had sensitivity of 85.7%, specificity of 98%. The most sensitive and specific individual Amsel's criterion was clue cells. Amsel's criteria with the lowest sensitivity and specificity were whiff test and vaginal pH respectively. Combination of clue cells with vaginal pH test were the highest in sensitive while whiff test with clue cells were the highest in specificity than the other combined two Amsel's criteria. CONCLUSION:Amsel's criteria diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis can be simplified by using a combination of the two criteria, vaginal pH and clue cells, in settings where time or Gram staining is not available.
Authors: F R Jones; G Miller; N Gadea; R Meza; S Leon; J Perez; A G Lescano; J Pajuelo; C F Caceres; J D Klausner; T J Coates Journal: Int J STD AIDS Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 1.359
Authors: Sherine Mohamed Shawaky; Mariam Majed Ali Al Shammari; Manal Shafik Sewelliam; Abeer Abd El Rahim Ghazal; Ahmed Noby Amer Journal: AIMS Microbiol Date: 2022-05-05
Authors: Matthew K Hoffman; Mrutyunjaya B Bellad; Umesh S Charantimath; Avinash Kavi; Jyoti M Nagmoti; Mahantesh B Nagmoti; Ashalata A Mallapur; Geetanjali M Katageri; Umesh Y Ramadurg; Sheshidhar G Bannale; Amit P Revankar; M S Ganachari; Richard J Derman; Shivaprasad S Goudar Journal: Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol Date: 2017-02-15
Authors: Andrew J Vallely; William S Pomat; Caroline Homer; Rebecca Guy; Stanley Luchters; Glen D L Mola; Grace Kariwiga; Lisa M Vallely; Virginia Wiseman; Chris Morgan; Handan Wand; Stephen J Rogerson; Sepehr N Tabrizi; David M Whiley; Nicola Low; Rosanna Peeling; Peter Siba; Michaela Riddell; Moses Laman; John Bolnga; Leanne J Robinson; Jacob Morewaya; Steven G Badman; Neha Batura; Angela Kelly-Hanku; Pamela J Toliman; Wilfred Peter; Delly Babona; Elizabeth Peach; Suzanne M Garland; John M Kaldor Journal: Wellcome Open Res Date: 2019-03-22
Authors: Adewale O Sule-Odu; Adedayo A Oluwole; Adebayo A Akadri; Babatunde A Andu; Adeniyi K Akiseku; Olubunmi A Osinupebi; Ismail A Lawal; Kolawole S Oritogun Journal: Ghana Med J Date: 2020-03