Literature DB >> 31031172

Targeted point-of-care testing compared with syndromic management of urogenital infections in women (WISH): a cross-sectional screening and diagnostic accuracy study.

Marijn C Verwijs1, Stephen K Agaba2, Jean-Claude Sumanyi2, Marie Michele Umulisa2, Lambert Mwambarangwe2, Viateur Musengamana2, Mireille Uwineza2, Vicky Cuylaerts3, Tania Crucitti3, Vicky Jespers3, Janneke H H M van de Wijgert4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Sexually transmitted and urogenital infections are typically managed by WHO-recommended syndromic algorithms in resource-poor countries, and presumptively in Europe. However, algorithms for vaginal discharge and lower abdominal pain perform poorly in women. The women's improvement of sexual and reproductive health (WISH) study in Kigali, Rwanda, sought to improve case-finding and infection management in women by introducing point-of-care tests. The main aim was to compare the performance of the WISH algorithms and the WHO vaginal discharge and lower abdominal pain algorithms with gold standard testing.
METHODS: This cross-sectional screening and diagnostic accuracy study recruited women aged 18 years or older with or without urogenital symptoms at risk of acquiring sexually transmitted infections in Kigali, Rwanda. Recruitment activities were implemented by study staff with the help of community mobilisers at health centres, pharmacies, markets, women's organisations, and at "umuganda" community meetings. At the study visit, participants had a face-to-face interview that included questions about current urogenital symptoms. Participants were first asked without prompting (spontaneous reporting), followed by questions about 14 specific symptoms (structural reporting). Next, the WISH algorithms were implemented. All participants had point-of-care tests for bacterial vaginosis (vaginal pH of 5·0 or above) and Trichomonas vaginalis (immunoassay) regardless of symptom reporting. Women with a positive risk score had point-of-care tests for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoea (nucleic acid amplification tests). Vulvovaginal candidiasis was treated presumptively. Nucleic acid amplification tests for C trachomatis, N gonorrhoeae, T vaginalis, bacterial vaginosis, and vulvovaginal candidiasis were the gold standard, and all patients provided swabs for these.
FINDINGS: Participants were recruited between July 5, 2016, and March 14, 2017. 705 participants were enrolled in the study and completed a study visit, and 51 attended 53 additional visits. Prevalence by gold standard testing was 8·5% for C trachomatis, 7·1% for N gonorrhoeae, 16·1% for T vaginalis, 18·1% for bacterial vaginosis, and 8·6% for vulvovaginal candidiasis. The WISH algorithms identified similar numbers of C trachomatis, N gonorrhoeae, and T vaginalis infections, but much higher numbers of bacterial vaginosis and vulvovaginal candidiasis infections. Compared with gold standard testing, the WISH algorithms had a good sensitivity and high specificity for C trachomatis (sensitivity 71·7%, specificity 100%), N gonorrhoeae (sensitivity 76·0%, specificity 100%), and T vaginalis (sensitivity 68·5%, specificity 97·4%), high sensitivity but low specificity for bacterial vaginosis (sensitivity 95·2%, specificity 41·2%), and moderate sensitivity and specificity for vulvovaginal candidiasis (sensitivity 64·4%, specificity 69·4%). The performance of vaginal pH testing for bacterial vaginosis improved by increasing the cutoff to 5·5, followed by confirmatory testing (sensitivity 73·6%, specificity 100%). The WHO algorithms had moderate sensitivity and poor specificity for all infections compared with gold standard testing: C trachomatis sensitivity 58·3%, specificity 44·7%; N gonorrhoeae sensitivity 66·0%, specificity 45·2%; T vaginalis sensitivity 60·4%, specificity 45·6%; bacterial vaginosis sensitivity 61·6%, specificity 46·0%; and vulvovaginal candidiasis sensitivity 74·6%, specificity 50·6%. Two participants attended additional visits because they had a mild allergic reaction to metronidazole. Staff and participants considered point-of-care testing feasible and acceptable.
INTERPRETATION: Point-of-care testing for urogenital infections might improve case-finding and infection management and is feasible in resource-poor settings. Point-of-care tests should be further developed, including those targeting multiple conditions. Additional studies in other populations, including populations with low prevalence of sexually transmitted and urogenital infections, are warranted. FUNDING: European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31031172     DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30724-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Infect Dis        ISSN: 1473-3099            Impact factor:   25.071


  16 in total

1.  Rapid electrostatic DNA enrichment for sensitive detection of Trichomonas vaginalis in clinical urinary samples.

Authors:  Justin M Rosenbohm; James M Robson; Rishabh Singh; Rose Lee; Jane Y Zhang; Catherine M Klapperich; Nira R Pollock; Mario Cabodi
Journal:  Anal Methods       Date:  2020-02-05       Impact factor: 2.896

Review 2.  Facilitators and barriers to point-of-care testing for sexually transmitted infections in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.

Authors:  Kevin Martin; Rhys Wenlock; Tom Roper; Ceri Butler; Jaime H Vera
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2022-06-20       Impact factor: 3.667

Review 3.  Point-of-Care Testing for Sexually Transmitted Infections: A Review of Recent Developments.

Authors:  Paul C Adamson; Michael J Loeffelholz; Jeffrey D Klausner
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2020-11-01       Impact factor: 5.534

4.  Cervicitis: Balancing the Goals of Empiric Therapy and Antimicrobial Stewardship to Improve Women's Health.

Authors:  Jodie Dionne-Odom; Jeanne Marrazzo
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 2.830

5.  Nugent Score, Amsel's Criteria, and a Point-of-Care Rapid Test for Diagnosis of Bacterial Vaginosis: Performance in a Cohort of Kenyan Women.

Authors:  Erica M Lokken; Clayton Jisuvei; Brenda Oyaro; Juma Shafi; Maureen Nyaigero; John Kinuthia; Kishor Mandaliya; Walter Jaoko; R Scott McClelland
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 2.830

Review 6.  HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis and sexually transmitted infections: intersection and opportunity.

Authors:  Jenell Stewart; Jared M Baeten
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2021-10-25       Impact factor: 16.430

Review 7.  Diagnosing sexually transmitted infections in resource-constrained settings: challenges and ways forward.

Authors:  Teodora Ec Wi; Francis J Ndowa; Cecilia Ferreyra; Cassandra Kelly-Cirino; Melanie M Taylor; Igor Toskin; James Kiarie; Nancy Santesso; Magnus Unemo
Journal:  J Int AIDS Soc       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 5.396

8.  Pathobionts in the Vaginal Microbiota: Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis of Three Sequencing Studies.

Authors:  Janneke H H M van de Wijgert; Marijn C Verwijs; A Christina Gill; Hanneke Borgdorff; Charlotte van der Veer; Philippe Mayaud
Journal:  Front Cell Infect Microbiol       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 5.293

Review 9.  Recent Advances and New Challenges in Cisgender Women's Gynecologic and Obstetric Health in the Context of HIV.

Authors:  Jennifer Deese; Renee Heffron; Heather Jaspan; Lindi Masson; Jennifer A Smit; Sengeziwe Sibeko
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 1.966

10.  Developing target product profiles for Neisseria gonorrhoeae diagnostics in the context of antimicrobial resistance: An expert consensus.

Authors:  Cecilia Ferreyra; Jennifer Osborn; Francis Moussy; Emilie Alirol; Monica Lahra; David Whiley; William Shafer; Magnus Unemo; Jeffrey Klausner; Cassandra Kelly Cirino; Teodora Wi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-09-01       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.