Skip to main content

This is a preprint.

It has not yet been peer reviewed by a journal.

The National Library of Medicine is running a pilot to include preprints that result from research funded by NIH in PMC and PubMed.

medRxiv logoLink to medRxiv
[Preprint]. 2024 Aug 20:2024.08.20.24312317. [Version 1] doi: 10.1101/2024.08.20.24312317

Sex Disparities in Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Treatment in US Adult Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Rachel E Solnick, Rahi Patel, Ethan Chang, Carmen Vargas-Torres, Maaz Munawar, Carlin Pendell, Judith E Smith, Ethan Cowan, Keith E Kocher, Roland C Merchant
PMCID: PMC11370513  PMID: 39228735

ABSTRACT

Importance

In US emergency departments (EDs), empiric antibiotic treatment for gonorrhea (GC) and chlamydia (CT) is common due to the unavailability of immediate test results. Evidence suggests sex-based disparities in treatment practices, with females potentially receiving less empiric treatment than males.

Objective

To investigate sex differences in empiric antibiotic treatment for GC and CT in EDs, comparing practices to subsequent laboratory-confirmed results.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This systematic review and meta-analysis included studies from US EDs reporting GC/CT testing and empiric antibiotic treatment from January 2010 to February 2021. A total of 1,644 articles were screened, with 17 studies (n = 31,062 patients) meeting inclusion criteria.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcomes were GC/CT test positivity, empiric antibiotic treatment rates, and discordance between treatment and test results, stratified by sex. Data were analyzed using a random-effects model.

Results

Overall GC/CT positivity was 14% (95% CI, 11%-16%): 11% (95% CI, 8%-14%) in females and 25% (95% CI, 23%-26%) in males. Empiric antibiotic treatment was administered in 46% (95% CI, 38%-55%) of cases: 31% (95% CI, 24%-37%) in females and 73% (95% CI, 65%-80%) in males. Among patients without a laboratory-confirmed infection, 38% (95% CI, 30%-47%) received treatment: 27% (95% CI, 20%-34%) of females and 64% (95% CI, 55%-73%) of males. Conversely, 39% (95% CI, 31%-48%) of patients with laboratory-confirmed infections were not treated: 52% (95% CI, 46%-57%) of females and 15% (95% CI, 12%-17%) of males.

Conclusions and Relevance

There is significant discordance between ED empiric antibiotic treatment and laboratory-confirmed results, with notable sex-based disparities. Females were 3.5 times more likely than males to miss treatment despite confirmed infection. These findings highlight the need for improved strategies to reduce sex-based disparities and enhance empiric treatment accuracy for GC/CT in ED settings.

Key Points

Question

Are there sex-based differences in empiric antibiotic treatment for gonorrhea and chlamydia in US emergency departments (EDs), and how do these practices compare to laboratory-confirmed results?

Findings

In this systematic review and meta-analysis of 17 studies with 31,062 patients, females were significantly less likely than males to receive empiric antibiotic treatment for gonorrhea and chlamydia. Additionally, 39% of patients with a laboratory-confirmed infection were not empirically treated, with females 3.5 times more likely to miss treatment than males.

Meaning

The findings indicate significant sex disparities in ED empiric antibiotic treatment for sexually transmitted infections, underscoring the need for improved strategies to ensure equitable and accurate treatment across sexes.

Full Text Availability

The license terms selected by the author(s) for this preprint version do not permit archiving in PMC. The full text is available from the preprint server.


Articles from medRxiv are provided here courtesy of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Preprints

RESOURCES