Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Quality in Health Care : QHC logoLink to Quality in Health Care : QHC
. 1993 Jun;2(2):91–95. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2.2.91

Use of laboratory testing for genital chlamydial infection in Norway.

P Aavitsland 1
PMCID: PMC1055091  PMID: 10131639

Abstract

OBJECTIVE--To assess the use of laboratory tests for genital chlamydial infection in Norway. DESIGN--Questionnaire survey of general practitioners' practice in chlamydial testing, retrospective survey of laboratory records, 1986-91, and prospective study of testing in one laboratory during four weeks. SETTING--All 18 microbiological laboratories in Norway (4.2 million population), including one serving all doctors in Vestfold county (0.2 million population). SUBJECTS--302 general practitioners. MAIN MEASURES--GPs' routine practice, methods used for testing, 1986-91, and sex specific and age group specific testing in 1991. RESULTS--201(69%) GPs replied to the questionnaire: 101(51%) would test all women younger than 25 years at routine pelvic examination, 107(54%) all girls at first pelvic examination, 131(66%) all pregnant women, and 106(54%) all men whose female partner had urogenital complaints. Nationwide in 1986, 122,000 tests were performed (2.9 per 100 population); 10% were positive and 51% were cell culture tests. In 1991, 341,000 tests were performed (8.0 per 100 population); 4.5% were positive and 15% were cell culture tests. 13,184 tests were performed in Vestfold in 1991 (6.6 per 100 population). The age group specific rates (per 100 population) among women were: age 15-19 years, 22.0(95% confidence interval 18.2 to 25.8); 20-24 years, 47.2(42.1 to 52.3); 25-29 years, 42.3(37.1 to 47.5); 30-34 years, 29.8(25.4 to 34.2); and 35-39 years, 12.5(9.5 to 15.5). CONCLUSIONS--GPs use liberal indications for testing. The dramatic increase in testing, especially by enzyme immunoassays, in populations with a low prevalence of infection results in low cost effectiveness and low predictive value of positive tests, which in women over 29 years is estimated as 17-36%. IMPLICATIONS--Doctors should be educated about the limitations of enzyme immunoassays in screening low prevalence populations, and laboratories should apply a confirmatory test to specimens testing positive with such assays.

Full text

PDF
91

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Aavitsland P. Survey of the treatment of Chlamydia trachomatis infection of the female genital tract. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1992 Jul;71(5):356–360. doi: 10.3109/00016349209021073. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Buhaug H., Skjeldestad F. E., Backe B., Dalen A. Cost effectiveness of testing for chlamydial infections in asymptomatic women. Med Care. 1989 Aug;27(8):833–841. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198908000-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cates W., Jr, Rolfs R. T., Jr, Aral S. O. Sexually transmitted diseases, pelvic inflammatory disease, and infertility: an epidemiologic update. Epidemiol Rev. 1990;12:199–220. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.epirev.a036054. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cates W., Jr, Wasserheit J. N. Genital chlamydial infections: epidemiology and reproductive sequelae. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991 Jun;164(6 Pt 2):1771–1781. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(91)90559-a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Chonmaitree T., Baldwin C. D., Lucia H. L. Role of the virology laboratory in diagnosis and management of patients with central nervous system disease. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1989 Jan;2(1):1–14. doi: 10.1128/cmr.2.1.1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Edwards P. J., Hall D. M. Screening, ethics, and the law. BMJ. 1992 Aug 1;305(6848):267–268. doi: 10.1136/bmj.305.6848.267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Estany A., Todd M., Vasquez M., McLaren R. Early detection of genital chlamydial infection in women: an economic evaluation. Sex Transm Dis. 1989 Jan-Mar;16(1):21–27. doi: 10.1097/00007435-198901000-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Handsfield H. H., Jasman L. L., Roberts P. L., Hanson V. W., Kothenbeutel R. L., Stamm W. E. Criteria for selective screening for Chlamydia trachomatis infection in women attending family planning clinics. JAMA. 1986 Apr 4;255(13):1730–1734. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Handsfield H. H., Jasman L. L., Roberts P. L., Hanson V. W., Kothenbeutel R. L., Stamm W. E. Criteria for selective screening for Chlamydia trachomatis infection in women attending family planning clinics. JAMA. 1986 Apr 4;255(13):1730–1734. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Johnson B. A., Poses R. M., Fortner C. A., Meier F. A., Dalton H. P. Derivation and validation of a clinical diagnostic model for chlamydial cervical infection in university women. JAMA. 1990 Dec 26;264(24):3161–3165. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Kellogg J. A. Clinical and laboratory considerations of culture vs antigen assays for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis from genital specimens. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1989 May;113(5):453–460. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Mills R. D., Young A., Cain K., Blair T. M., Sitorius M. A., Woods G. L. Chlamydiazyme plus blocking assay to detect Chlamydia trachomatis in endocervical specimens. Am J Clin Pathol. 1992 Feb;97(2):209–212. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/97.2.209. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Mowinckel R., Staurset J. A., Holen P., Aavitsland P. Norske legers rutiner for smitteoppsporing ved genitale chlamydiainfeksjoner. En spørreundersøkelse. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 1992 May 20;112(13):1729–1733. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Nettleman M. D., Jones R. B. Cost-effectiveness of screening women at moderate risk for genital infections caused by Chlamydia trachomatis. JAMA. 1988 Jul 8;260(2):207–213. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Nordbø S. A., Mehl A., Vik I. S., Ragnhildstveit E. Diagnostikk av Chlamydia trachomatis--dyrking eller enzymimmunoassay? En norsk multisenterundersøkelse. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 1991 Aug 20;111(19):2413–2416. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Phillips R. S., Aronson M. D., Taylor W. C., Safran C. Should tests for Chlamydia trachomatis cervical infection be done during routine gynecologic visits? An analysis of the costs of alternative strategies. Ann Intern Med. 1987 Aug;107(2):188–194. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-107-2-188. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Taylor-Robinson D., Thomas B. J. Laboratory techniques for the diagnosis of chlamydial infections. Genitourin Med. 1991 Jun;67(3):256–266. doi: 10.1136/sti.67.3.256. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Zimmerman H. L., Potterat J. J., Dukes R. L., Muth J. B., Zimmerman H. P., Fogle J. S., Pratts C. I. Epidemiologic differences between chlamydia and gonorrhea. Am J Public Health. 1990 Nov;80(11):1338–1342. doi: 10.2105/ajph.80.11.1338. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Quality in Health Care are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES