Urine gonococcal/Chlamydia testing in adolescents

Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 18, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 498-502

  Spigarelli, Michael G ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI   (United States)

^b CINCINNATI CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Chlamydia trachomatis; Neisseria gonorrhoeae

Indexed keywords

CHLAMYDIA; CHLAMYDIASIS; GOLD STANDARD; GONORRHEA; HEALTH CARE POLICY; NEISSERIA GONORRHOEAE; NONHUMAN; POPULATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SCREENING; URINALYSIS;

ADOLESCENT; CHLAMYDIA; CHLAMYDIA INFECTIONS; CHLAMYDIA TRACHOMATIS; FEMALE; GONORRHEA; HUMANS; MALE; MASS SCREENING; NEISSERIA GONORRHOEAE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES;

EID: 33748276929     PISSN: 1040872X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.gco.0000242951.87125.b2     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Weinstock H, Berman S, Cates W. Sexually transmitted diseases among American youth: incidence and prevalence estimates. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2004; 36:6-10.
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance, 2004. Atlanta, Georgia: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2005.
3. Miller WC, Ford CA, Morris M, et al. Prevalence of chlamydia and gonococcal infections among young adults in the United States. JAMA 2004; 291:2229-2236.
4. Burstein GR, Zenilman JM, Gaydos CA, et al. Predictors of repeat Chlamydia trachomatis infections diagnosed by DNA amplification testing among inner city females. Sex Transm Infect 2001; 77:26-32.
5. Fortenberry JD, Breizendine EJ, Katz BP, et al. Subsequent sexually transmitted infections among adolescent women with genital infection due to Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, or Trichomonas vaginalis. Sex Transm Dis 1999; 75:26-32.
6. Orr DP, Johnston K, Brizendine E, et al. Subsequent sexually transmitted infection in urban adolescents and young adults. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2001; 155:947-953.
7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexually transmitted diseases treatment guidelines 2002. MMWR 2002; 51:1-77.
8. Clad A, Prillwitz J, Hintz KC, et al. Discordant prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis in asymptomatic couples screened using urine ligase chain reaction. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2001; 5:324-328.
9. Honey E, Augood C, Templeton A, et al. Cost effectiveness of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis: a review of published studies. Sex Transm Infect 2002; 78:406-412.
10. Black CM. Current methods of laboratory diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infections. Clin Microbiol 1997; 10:160-184.
11. Van Dyck E, Ieven M, Pattyn S, et al. Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae by enzyme immunoassay, culture, and three nucleic acid amplification tests. J Clin Microbiol 2001; 39:1751-1756.
12. Livengood CH, Wrenn JW. Evaluation of COBAS AMPLICOR (Roche): accuracy in detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae by coamplification of endocervical specimens. J Clin Microbiol 2001; 39:2928-2932.
13. Kehl SC, Georgakas K, Swain GR, et al. Evaluation of the abbott LCx assay for detection of Neisseria gonorrhoeae in endocervical swab specimens from females. J Clin Microbiol 1998; 36:3549-3551.
14. Cook RL, Hutchison SL, Ostergaard L, et al. Systematic review: noninvasive testing for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae. Ann Intern Med 2005; 142:914-925. Well referenced, well done systemic review. The authors conclude that NAATs detect chlamydia and gonorrhea reasonably well, but that negative results on PCR assays of urine samples are not useful for ruling out gonococcal infections in women.
15. Morre SA, Sillekens PTG, Jacobs MV, et al. Monitoring of Chlamydia trachomatis infections after antibiotic treatment using RNA detection by nucleic acid sequence based amplification. J Clin Pathol Med Pathol 1998; 51:149-154.
16. LaMontagne DS, Fenton KA, Pimenta JM, et al. Using chlamydia positivity to estimate prevalence: evidence from the Chlamydia Screening Pilot in England. Int J STD Aids 2005; 16:323-327.
17. Jespersen DJ, Flatten KS, Jones MF, Smith TF. Prospective comparison of cell culture and nucleic acid amplification tests for the laboratory diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infection. J Clin Microbiol 2005; 43:5324-5326. This article is a prospective comparison of cell culture and NAATs; the study did not use urine-based samples.
18. Burstein GR, Snyder MH, Conley D, et al. Chlamydia screening in a health plan before and after a national performance measure introduction. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106:327-334. This paper describes a simple intervention that increased screening; it does not address adolescents specifically and used cervical sampling rather than urine-based testing. This type of policy change could certainly be implemented for urine-based testing.
19. Ray MN, Wall T, Casebeer L, et al. Chlamydia screening of at-risk young women in managed healthcare: characteristics of top-performing primary care offices. Sex Transm Dis 2005; 32:382-386.
20. Hu D, Hook EW, Goldie SJ. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in women 15 to 29 years of age: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med 2004; 141:501-513.
21. Bernstein KT, Mehta SD, Rompalo AM, Erbelding EJ. Cost-effectiveness of screening strategies for gonorrhea among females in private sector care. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107:813-821. This paper describes the methodology for performing cost-effective analysis as well as providing an explanation for the conclusions that are drawn.
22. Miller WC, Zenilman JM. Epidemiology of Chlamydial infection, gonorrhea, and trichomoniasis in the United States - 2005. Infect Dis Clin N Am 2005; 19:281-296. Thorough overview of the epidemiology of STIs; it is particularly detailed and well written.
23. Bakken IJ, Nordbo SA, Skjeldestad FE. Chlamydia trachomatis testing patterns and prevalence of genital chlamydial infection among young men and women in central Norway 1990-2003: a population-based registry study. Sex Transm Dis 2006; 33:26-30. A population-based analysis revealing more women than men are tested, but that the rate of testing falls below what would be adequate based upon local health guidelines. The authors concluded that more men and female teenagers should be tested. Repeat testing is particularly important those diagnosed with C. trachomatis.
24. McCadden A, Fenton KA, McManus S, et al. Chlamydia trachomatis testing in the second British National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles: respondent uptake and treatment outcomes. Sex Transm Dis 2006; 32:387-394. Intriguing method of screening a large, asymptomatic population with implications for response to notification, subsequent treatment and partner notification.
25. Gotz HM, Veldhuijzen IK, van Bergen JEAM, et al. Acceptability and consequences of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis by home-based urine testing. Sex Transm Dis 2005; 32:557-562. This paper reports on an opinion poll regarding acceptability of mail-based urinary Chlamydia testing. The respondents felt that mailing specimens was an easy and acceptable method of screening.
26. Eggleston E, Turner CF, Rogers SM, et al. Monitoring STI prevalence using telephone surveys and mailed urine specimens: a pilot test. Sex Transm Infect 2005; 81:236-238. US-based survey using incentives for survey and specimen return.
27. Logan S, Browne J, McKenzie H, et al. Evaluation of endocervical, first-void urine and self-administered vulval swabs for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in a miscarriage population. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol 2005; 112:103-106. Although a well written paper demonstrating that self-administered (urine or self-vaginal swab) is preferred by the patient population studied, the study itself is underpowered, preventing any in-depth analysis of why the urine results were more likely to produce ambiguous results.
28. Mahony J, Chong S, Luinstra K, et al. Urine specimens from pregnant and nonpregnant women inhibitory to amplification of Chlamydia trachomatis nucleic acid by PCR, ligase chain reaction, and transcription-mediated amplification: identification of urinary substances associated with inhibition and removal of inhibitory activity. J Clin Microbiol 1998; 36:3122-3126.
29. Gaydos CA. Nucleic acid amplification tests for Gonorrhea and Chlamydia: practice and applications. Infect Dis Clin N Am 2005; 19:367-386. Thorough overview of NAAT testing for gonorrhea and Chlamydia.
30. Lofy KH, Hofmann J, Mosure DJ, et al. Chlamydial infections among female adolescents screened in juvenile detention centers in Washington State. Sex Transm Dis 2006; 33:63-67.
31. Kahn RH, Mosure DJ, Blank S, et al. Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoea prevalence and coinfection in adolescents entering selected US juvenile detention centers, 1997-2002. Sex Transm Dis 2005; 32:255-259.
32. Robertson AA, Thomas CB, St Lawrence JS, Pack R. Preditors of infection with chlamydia or gonorrhea in incarcerated adolescents. Sex Transm Dis 2005; 32:387-394.
33. Decker MR, Silverman JG, Raj A. Dating violence and sexually transmitted disease/HIV testing and diagnosis among adolescent females. Pediatrics 2005; 116:272-276. The connection between dating violence and testing for STDs is described. This highlights the need to openly discuss the potential for those diagnosed with STDs regarding dating violence.