| Literature DB >> 30591043 |
Richard Harry Asmah1, Rita Ofosuaa Agyeman2, Noah Obeng-Nkrumah2, Harriet Blankson2, Georgina Awuah-Mensah3, Momodou Cham4, Listowell Asare4, Patrick Ferdinand Ayeh-Kumi2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is little data on Trichomonas vaginalis infection in Ghana. This study evaluated the prevalence of trichomoniasis using different diagnostic methods and determined the risk factors for infection in patients.Entities:
Keywords: Ghana; Polymerase chain reaction; Risk factors; Trichomoniasis; Wet mount
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30591043 PMCID: PMC6307156 DOI: 10.1186/s12905-018-0699-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Womens Health ISSN: 1472-6874 Impact factor: 2.809
Detection of Trichomonas vaginalis in patients with Wet Mount Microscopy, JD’s Trichomonas V® Rapid Antigen Test and PCR
| Patients and specimens | Diagnostic methods | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wet Mount Microscopy | Rapid Antigen Test | PCR | ||||
| No. | No. positive (%) [95%Cla] | No. | No. positive (%) [95%Cl] | No. | No. positive (%) [95%Cl] | |
| All patients | 150 | 24 (16.0) [10.9, 22.7] | 150 | 19(12.6) [8.3, 18.9] | 150 | 64(42.6) [35.0, 50.6] |
| Gender | ||||||
| Females | 110 | 24 (21.8) [15.1, 30.4] | 110 | 15 (13.6) [8.4, 21.9] | 110 | 53(48.1) [39.1, 57.2] |
| Males | 40 | 0 | 40 | 4 (10.0) [3.9, 23.1] | 40 | 11 (27.5) [16.1, 42.8] |
| All specimens | 300 | 25 (8.3) [5.7, 12.1] | 300 | 28 (9.3) [6.5, 13.2] | 300 | 127 (42.3) [36.8, 47.9] |
| Specimen type | ||||||
| Vaginal swab | 110 | 23 (20.9) [13.7, 29.7] | 110 | 15 (13.6) [8.4, 21.9] | 110 | 53 (48.1) [39.1, 57.2] |
| Female urine | 110 | 2 (1.82) [0.5, 6.4] | 110 | 9 (8.1) [4.3, 14.8] | 110 | 52 (47.3) [38.2, 56.5] |
| Urethral swab | 40 | 0 | 40 | 4 (10.0) [3.9, 23.1] | 40 | 11 (27.5) [16.1, 42.8] |
| Male urine | 40 | 0 | 40 | 0 | 40 | 11 (27.5) [16.1, 42.8] |
| Without genitourinary symptoms | ||||||
| Females | 39 | 4 (10.3) [4.1, 23.6] | 39 | 0 | 39 | 0 |
| Males | 30 | 0 | 30 | 4(13.3) [5.3, 29.8] | 30 | 10 (33.3) [19.2–51.2] |
| With genitourinary symptoms | ||||||
| Females | 71 | 20 (28.1) [19.0, 39.5] | 71 | 15 (12.1) [13.3, 33.7] | 71 | 53 (74.6) [63.5, 83.2] |
| Males | 10 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 10 | 0 |
| Genital discharge | ||||||
| Females | 54 | 14 (21.1) [16.1, 38.9] | 54 | 14 (21.1) [16.1, 38.9] | 54 | 38(70.3) [157.1, 80.6] |
| Males | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
| Itching around genital area | ||||||
| Females | 49 | 11 (22.4) [13.1, 35.8] | 49 | 14 (28.5) [17.9, 42.4] | 49 | 35 (71.4) [57.6, 82.9] |
| Males | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Painful micturition | ||||||
| Females | 18 | 8 (44.4) [25.6, 66.3] | 18 | 10 (55.5) [33.7, 75.4] | 18 | 13 (72.2) [49.1, 87.5] |
| Males | 8 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 8 | 0 |
| Genital ulcers | ||||||
| Females | 5 | 4 (80.0) [37.6, 96.4] | 5 | 5 (100.0) [56.5, 100.0] | 5 | 5 (100.0) [56.5, 100.0] |
| Males | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Burns | ||||||
| Females | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Males | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
aClinical diagnosis, physician-assisted clinical summary/diagnosis; CI confidence interval, VS high vaginal swab, UTI urinary tract infection, STI sexually transmitted infection, PID pelvic inflammatory disease, PCR Polymerase Chain Reaction; others, clinical diagnosis not related to genitourinary diseases and those without specific diagnosis
Diagnostic performance of Mount Microscopy and JD’s Trichomonas V® Rapid Antigen Assay compared to PCR in the detection of T. vaginalis among females
| Diagnosticsa | PCR | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Testa | Percent sensitivity (95%CI) | Percent Specificity (95%CI) | Predictive values | Likelihood ratio | Cohen’s Kappa values (95%CI) | |||
| Pos.; Neg. | Positive | Negative | Positive | Negative | ||||
| Wet Mount Microscopy | 18/24; 87/126 | 31.6 | 93.5 | 75.0 | 69.1 | 3.0 | 0.45 | 0.283(70.0%) |
| Females | 18/24; 58/86 | 39.2 | 90.6 | 75.0 | 67.4 | 3 | 0.48 | 0.313 |
| Males | 0/0; 29/40 | 0 | 100 | – | 72.5 | – | 0.37 | 0.00 |
| Symptomatic patients | 14/20; 28/61 | 33.3 | 86.7 | 70.0 | 54.1 | 2.3 | 0.85 | 0.109 |
| Asymptomatic patients | 4/4; 59/65 | 40.0 | 100 | 100 | 0.9 | – | 0.10 | 0.533 |
| Antigen Test | 15/19; 87/132 | 25.0 | 96.7 | 83.3 | 65.9 | 5.0 | 0.52 | 0.233 |
| Females | 13/15;57/95 | 25.4 | 96.6 | 86.6 | 0.6 | 6.5 | 0.67 | 0.232 |
| Males | 3/4; 29/36 | 0.3 | 96.7 | 75.0 | 80.5 | 3 | 0.24 | 0.333 |
| Asymptomatic patients | 3/4; 55/65 | 23.1 | 98.2 | 75.0 | 84.6 | 3 | 0.18 | 0.290 |
| Symptomatic patients | 13/15; 28/66 | 25.4 | 93.3 | 86.6 | 42.4 | 6.5 | 1.4 | 0.151 |
aPos. (a/b), true positives as confirmed with PCR/total positives from diagnostic test; Neg. (c/d), true negatives as confirmed with PCR/total negatives from diagnostic test; CI confidence interval, PCR polymerase chain reaction
Univariate analysis of patient’s characteristics for potential risk factors of T. vaginalis infection
| Covariatesa | Patients ( | Patients with | Unadjusted Odds ratio | 95%CI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes ( | No ( | |||||
| Demographics | ||||||
| Female gender | 110 | 53 | 57 | 2.45 | 1.11, 5.39 | 0.026 |
| Age (±SD)b | 31.12 ± 12.12 | 19.35 ± 7.89 | 2.03 | 1.06,3.92 | 0.001 | |
| Age groups (years) | ||||||
| < 18 (minors) | 10 | 6 | 4 | 2.12 | 0.57,7.85 | 0.326 |
| 18–35 (young adults) | 84 | 33 | 51 | 0.73 | 0.38,1.40 | 0.406 |
| 35–55 (middle-aged adults) | 56 | 25 | 31 | 1.14 | 0.58,2.18 | 0.735 |
| Locality | ||||||
| Inner town | 85 | 33 | 52 | 0.69 | 0.36, 1.33 | 0.318 |
| Town outskirt | 33 | 19 | 14 | 2.17 | 0.99,4.75 | 0.072 |
| Village | 32 | 12 | 20 | 0.76 | 0.34,1.69 | 0.551 |
| Marital status | ||||||
| Single | 42 | 24 | 29 | 0.45 | 0.23, 0.87 | 0.021 |
| Married | 63 | 22 | 33 | 0.84 | 0.43, 1.65 | 0.732 |
| Divorced widowed | 23 | 11 | 12 | 1.57 | 0.65, 3.83 | 0.363 |
| Pregnant | 45 | 12 | 33 | 0.371 | 0.17, 0.79 | 0.011 |
| Education | ||||||
| None | 22 | 15 | 7 | 3.23 | 1.23, 8.48 | 0.019 |
| Basic school | 59 | 20 | 39 | 0.55 | 0.27, 1.07 | 0.093 |
| S.H.S | 37 | 13 | 24 | 0.66 | 0.31, 1.42 | 0.340 |
| Tertiary | 32 | 16 | 16 | 1.40 | 0.64, 3.06 | 0.427 |
| Employed | 85 | 20 | 65 | 0.143 | 0.07, 0.30 | < 0.001 |
aT. vaginitis infection was defined with positivity to PCR diagnostic tests; SD standard deviation, CI confidence interval, S.H.S Senior High School, STI sexually transmitted disease
bAge was considered as a continuous variable from 16 to 55 years
Univariate analysis of patients sexual and health characteristics for potential risk factors of T. vaginalis infection
| Covariatesa | Patients | Patients with | Unadjusted Odds ratio | 95%CI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes ( | No ( | |||||
| Knowledge of STI | 96 | 22 | 74 | 0.08 | 0.04, 0.19 | < 0.001 |
| Previously had STI | ||||||
| No | 103 | 22 | 81 | 0.032 | 0.01, 0.09 | < 0.001 |
| Yes | 22 | 10 | 12 | 1.36 | 0.54, 3.41 | 0.634 |
| No idea | 25 | 12 | 13 | 1.33 | 0.56, 3.14 | 0.658 |
| Showed symptoms of STI | 81 | 20 | 61 | 0.17 | 0.08, 0.35 | < 0.001 |
| Genital discharge | 57 | 38 | 19 | 5.15 | 2.52,10.51 | < 0.001 |
| Itching around genital area | 50 | 35 | 15 | 5.71 | 2.71, 12.01 | < 0.001 |
| Painful micturition | 26 | 13 | 13 | 1.43 | 0.61, 3.34 | 0.513 |
| Genital ulcers | 6 | 5 | 1 | 7.20 | 0.82, 63.25 | 0.083 |
| Urethral burns | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | – | 0.507 |
| No. of sexual partners in past 1 year | ||||||
| 0 | 38 | 9 | 29 | 0.32 | 0.13, 0.71 | 0.007 |
| 1 | 112 | 55 | 57 | 3.11 | 1.35, 7.16 | 0.007 |
| Partner(s) had other sexual partner(s) in past 1 year | ||||||
| No | 89 | 20 | 69 | 0.09 | 0.05, 2.13 | < 0.001 |
| Yes | 28 | 15 | 13 | 1.72 | 0.75, 3.93 | 0.210 |
| No idea | 23 | 13 | 10 | 1.93 | 0.79, 4.75 | 0.172 |
| No condom use | 101 | 50 | 51 | 2.15 | 1.17, 5.09 | 0.021 |
| Alcohol use | 44 | 9 | 35 | 0.87 | 0.344, 2.22 | 0.7775 |
| Co-infection with yeast | 79 | 19 | 60 | 1.65 | 0.56, 4.89 | 0.3686 |
aT. vaginitis infection was defined with positivity to PCR diagnostic tests; CI confidence interval, STI sexually transmitted disease
Multivariate analysis for risk factors of T. vaginalis infection
| Risk factora | Level | Adjusted Odds Ratio | 95%CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Female gender | Yes/No | 24.87 | 10.55, 51.19 | 0.001 |
| Age (±SD) | 1 year increase | 1.41 | 1.09, 3.54 | 0.013 |
| Knowledge of STI | Yes/No | 0.16 | 0.08, 0.31 | 0.014 |
aThe predictive accuracy of the models evaluated by Hosmer and Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test was non-significant with P-value > 0.05 suggesting that the model predicted accurately on average. The discriminatory power of the multiple logistic regression analysis as measured by the area under the ROC curve was 0.791. Stepwise modelling was adjusted for univariate variables with P-value < 0.05
Fig. 1Profile of Trichomonas vaginalis prevalence across patients’ age with Tricube Kernel smooth fit line generated with local polynomial regression at 60% of points to fit. Over the period of study, T. vaginalis cases were predominant in females. There is apparent relationship between age and infection prevalence among females that peaks at approximately age 26 years