+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

A comparison of first-void urine, self-administered low vaginal swab, self-inserted tampon, and endocervical swab using PCR tests for the detection of infection with Chlamydia trachomatis



A comparison of first-void urine, self-administered low vaginal swab, self-inserted tampon, and endocervical swab using PCR tests for the detection of infection with Chlamydia trachomatis



Sexual Health 1(1): 51-54



Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests, AMPLICOR, Roche Diagnostics, were shown to be an acceptable and sensitive method of detecting Chlamydia trachomatis infection. The PCR test's ability to evaluate different specimen types is worth determining, as well as the acceptability to Thai women of the self-collection of samples. Of the 1011 subjects interviewed, 953/1011 subjects (94.3%) agreed to self-test, 523 were commercial sex workers (CSWs) and 430 were outpatient women (OPW). More than half [570/953 (59.8%)] participated in the four-specimen collection, to be tested by PCR for C. trachomatis. Specimens were collected via first-void urine (FVU), self-administered low vaginal swab (LVS), self-inserted tampon, and endocervical swab (ES). The majority, 906/953 subjects (95.1%), had only three methods of specimen collection, LVS being excluded. The prevalence of positive C. trachomatis detection among the CSWs/OPW was 17.6/7.2%, 15.6/5.4%, 12.8/4.2%, and 11.6/5.7% using tampons, LVS, FUV, and ES collection methods respectively. Tampons were used to compare results from other specimen types in both groups. Significantly more OPWs were willing to use a tampon for repeat specimen collection (85.1%) than were the CSWs (62.3%). Willingness to use a LVS again was not significant, 75.2% in outpatient women and 74% in CSWs. Tampon and LVS, self-collection methods are acceptable to women in Thailand and are a good alternative method for detection of C. trachomatis.

(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 048057670

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 16335296


Related references

Evaluation of self-collected vaginal swab, first void urine, and endocervical swab specimens for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in adolescent females. Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology 21(6): 355-360, 2008

Evaluation of self-collected vaginal swab, first void urine and endocervical swab specimens for the detection of Chlamydia and Gonorrhoeae in adolescent females using BD ProbTecTMET. Pediatric Research 53(4 Part 2): 564A, 2003

Evaluation of a new amplified enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in male urine, female endocervical swab, and patient obtained vaginal swab specimens. Journal of Clinical Pathology 53(5): 350-354, 2000

Comparison of penile skin swab with intra-urethral swab and first void urine for polymerase chain reaction-based diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis urethritis in male patients. Sexually Transmitted Diseases 35(12): 999-1001, 2008

Evaluation of TaqMan real-time PCR assays for detection of Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis in throat swab and endocervical swab specimens in comparison with the BD ProbeTec ET system. 2007

Comparison of first-voided urine specimens with endocervical swab specimens for enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in women. Archives of Family Medicine 3(8): 672-675, 1994

Comparison of first void urine and urogenital swab specimens for detection of Mycoplasma genitalium and Chlamydia trachomatis by polymerase chain reaction in patients attending a sexually transmitted disease clinic. Sexually Transmitted Diseases 31(8): 499-507, 2004

Comparison of Gen-Probe APTIMA Combo 2 assay to BDProbeTec ET assay for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in urine and endocervical swab specimens from females. Abstracts of the General Meeting of the American Society for Microbiology 102: 129, 2002

Evaluation of urine versus endocervical swab sensitivity in the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae by the LCx and COBAS AMPLICOR. Abstracts of the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents & Chemotherapy 39: 688, 1999

Comparison of swab with cytobrush for recovery of endocervical cells and for chlamydiazyme detection of chlamydia trachomatis. Abstracts of the General Meeting of the American Society for Microbiology 91: 383, 1991

Performance of the APTIMA Combo 2 assay for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in female urine and endocervical swab specimens. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 41(1): 304-309, 2003

Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in urine samples by nucleic acid tests: comparison with culture and enzyme immunoassay of genital swab specimens. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 35(12): 3355-3357, 1997

Evaluation of endocervical, first-void urine and self-administered vulval swabs for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in a miscarriage population. Bjog 112(1): 103-106, 2005

Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis and Mycoplasma genitalium; is first void urine or genital swab best?. Sexually Transmitted Infections 91(2): 141, 2015

Comparison between vaginal swab and endocervical swab during pelvic examination. Journal of Adolescent Health 15(3): 245-248, 1994