Skip to main content
PMC home page
Sexually Transmitted Infections logoLink to Sexually Transmitted Infections
. 2005 Feb;81(1):17–23. doi: 10.1136/sti.2004.010173

Prevalence of urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis increases significantly with level of urbanisation and suggests targeted screening approaches: results from the first national population based study in the Netherlands

J van Bergen 1, H Gotz 1, J Richardus 1, C Hoebe 1, J Broer 1, A Coenen 1, t for 1
PMCID: PMC1763744  PMID: 15681716

Abstract

Objectives: Chlamydia trachomatis (Chlamydia) is the most prevalent sexually transmitted bacterial infection and can cause considerable reproductive morbidity in women. Chlamydia screening programmes have been considered but policy recommendations are hampered by the lack of population based data. This paper describes the prevalence of Chlamydia in 15–29 year old women and men in rural and urban areas, as determined through systematic population based screening organised by the Municipal Public Health Services (MHS), and discusses the implications of this screening strategy for routine implementation.

Methods: Stratified national probability survey according to "area address density" (AAD). 21 000 randomly selected women and men in four regions, aged 15–29 years received a home sampling kit. Urine samples were returned by mail and tested by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Treatment was via the general practitioner, STI clinic, or MHS clinic.

Results: 41% (8383) responded by sending in urine and questionnaire. 11% (2227) returned a refusal card. Non-responders included both higher and lower risk categories. Chlamydia prevalence was significantly lower in rural areas (0.6%, 95% CI 0.1 to 1.1) compared with very highly urbanised areas (3.2%, 95% CI 2.4 to 4.0). Overall prevalence was 2.0% (95% CI 1.7 to 2.3): 2.5% (95% CI 2.0 to 3.0%) in women and 1.5% (95% CI 1.1 to 1.8) in men. Of all cases 91% were treated. Infection was associated with degree of urbanisation, ethnicity, number of sex partners, and symptoms.

Conclusion: This large, population based study found very low prevalence in rural populations, suggesting that nationwide systematic screening is not indicated in the Netherlands and that targeted approaches are a better option. Further analysis of risk profiles will contribute to determine how selective screening can be done.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (103.5 KB).

Selected References

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

  1. Andersen Berit, Olesen Frede, Møller Jens K., Østergaard Lars. Population-based strategies for outreach screening of urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis infections: a randomized, controlled trial. J Infect Dis. 2002 Jan 3;185(2):252–258. doi: 10.1086/338268. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Boag F., Kelly F. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis. The case for screening is made, but much detail remains to be worked out. BMJ. 1998 May 16;316(7143):1474–1474. doi: 10.1136/bmj.316.7143.1474. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Catchpole M., Robinson A., Temple A. Chlamydia screening in the United Kingdom. Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Feb;79(1):3–4. doi: 10.1136/sti.79.1.3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Coenen A. J. J., Berends R., Van der Meijden W. I. The organization of STI control in the Netherlands - an overview. Int J STD AIDS. 2002 Apr;13(4):254–260. doi: 10.1258/0956462021925054. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Duncan B., Hart G., Scoular A., Bigrigg A. Qualitative analysis of psychosocial impact of diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis: implications for screening. BMJ. 2001 Jan 27;322(7280):195–199. doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7280.195. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Egger M., Low N., Smith G. D., Lindblom B., Herrmann B. Screening for chlamydial infections and the risk of ectopic pregnancy in a county in Sweden: ecological analysis. BMJ. 1998 Jun 13;316(7147):1776–1780. doi: 10.1136/bmj.316.7147.1776. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Fleming D. T., Wasserheit J. N. From epidemiological synergy to public health policy and practice: the contribution of other sexually transmitted diseases to sexual transmission of HIV infection. Sex Transm Infect. 1999 Feb;75(1):3–17. doi: 10.1136/sti.75.1.3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Getz Linn, Sigurdsson Johann A., Hetlevik Irene. Is opportunistic disease prevention in the consultation ethically justifiable? BMJ. 2003 Aug 30;327(7413):498–500. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7413.498. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Grimes David A., Schulz Kenneth F. Uses and abuses of screening tests. Lancet. 2002 Mar 9;359(9309):881–884. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07948-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Götz H. M., van Bergen J. E. A. M., Veldhuijzen I. K., Broer J., Hoebe C. J. P. A., Steyerberg E. W., Coenen A. J. J., de Groot F., Verhooren M. J. C., van Schaik D. T. A prediction rule for selective screening of Chlamydia trachomatis infection. Sex Transm Infect. 2005 Feb;81(1):24–30. doi: 10.1136/sti.2004.010181. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Hart G. J., Duncan B., Fenton K. A. Chlamydia screening and sexual health. Sex Transm Infect. 2002 Dec;78(6):396–397. doi: 10.1136/sti.78.6.396. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Hillis S. D., Nakashima A., Amsterdam L., Pfister J., Vaughn M., Addiss D., Marchbanks P. A., Owens L. M., Davis J. P. The impact of a comprehensive chlamydia prevention program in Wisconsin. Fam Plann Perspect. 1995 May-Jun;27(3):108–111. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Honey E., Augood C., Templeton A., Russell I., Paavonen J., Mårdh P-A, Stary A., Stray-Pedersen B. Cost effectiveness of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis: a review of published studies. Sex Transm Infect. 2002 Dec;78(6):406–412. doi: 10.1136/sti.78.6.406. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Johnson A. M., Grun L., Haines A. Controlling genital chlamydial infection. BMJ. 1996 Nov 9;313(7066):1160–1161. doi: 10.1136/bmj.313.7066.1160. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Kamwendo F., Forslin L., Bodin L., Danielsson D. Programmes to reduce pelvic inflammatory disease--the Swedish experience. Lancet. 1998;351 (Suppl 3):25–28. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(98)90008-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Low Nicola, Egger Matthias. What should we do about screening for genital chlamydia? Int J Epidemiol. 2002 Oct;31(5):891–893. doi: 10.1093/ije/31.5.891. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Marteau Theresa M., Kinmonth Ann Louise. Screening for cardiovascular risk: public health imperative or matter for individual informed choice? BMJ. 2002 Jul 13;325(7355):78–80. doi: 10.1136/bmj.325.7355.78. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Mehta S. D., Shahmanesh M., Zenilman J. M. Spending money to save money. Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Feb;79(1):4–6. doi: 10.1136/sti.79.1.4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Miller W. C. Screening for chlamydial infection. A model program based on prevalence. Sex Transm Dis. 1998 Apr;25(4):201–210. doi: 10.1097/00007435-199804000-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Morré S. A., Meijer C. J., Munk C., Krüger-Kjaer S., Winther J. F., Jørgensens H. O., van Den Brule A. J. Pooling of urine specimens for detection of asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections by PCR in a low-prevalence population: cost-saving strategy for epidemiological studies and screening programs. J Clin Microbiol. 2000 Apr;38(4):1679–1680. doi: 10.1128/jcm.38.4.1679-1680.2000. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Morré S. A., Welte R., Postma M. J. Major improvements in cost effectiveness of screening women for Chlamydia trachomatis using pooled urine specimens and high performance testing. Sex Transm Infect. 2002 Feb;78(1):74–75. doi: 10.1136/sti.78.1.74. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Morré S. A., van Dijk R., Meijer C. J., van den Brule A. J., Kjaer S. K., Munk C. Pooling cervical swabs for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis by PCR: sensitivity, dilution, inhibition, and cost-saving aspects. J Clin Microbiol. 2001 Jun;39(6):2375–2376. doi: 10.1128/jcm.39.6.2375-2376.2001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Mårdh P. A. Is Europe ready for STD screening? Genitourin Med. 1997 Apr;73(2):96–98. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Ostergaard L., Andersen B., Møller J. K., Olesen F. Home sampling versus conventional swab sampling for screening of Chlamydia trachomatis in women: a cluster-randomized 1-year follow-up study. Clin Infect Dis. 2000 Oct 25;31(4):951–957. doi: 10.1086/318139. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Paukku Maarit, Kilpikari Riika, Puolakkainen Mirja, Oksanen Hanna, Apter Dan, Paavonen Jorma. Criteria for selective screening for Chlamydia trachomatis. Sex Transm Dis. 2003 Feb;30(2):120–123. doi: 10.1097/00007435-200302000-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Pimenta J. M., Catchpole M., Rogers P. A., Hopwood J., Randall S., Mallinson H., Perkins E., Jackson N., Carlisle C., Hewitt G. Opportunistic screening for genital chlamydial infection. II: prevalence among healthcare attenders, outcome, and evaluation of positive cases. Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Feb;79(1):22–27. doi: 10.1136/sti.79.1.22. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Schachter J. DFA, EIA, PCR, LCR and other technologies: what tests should be used for diagnosis of chlamydia infections? Immunol Invest. 1997 Jan-Feb;26(1-2):157–161. doi: 10.3109/08820139709048923. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Scholes D., Stergachis A., Heidrich F. E., Andrilla H., Holmes K. K., Stamm W. E. Prevention of pelvic inflammatory disease by screening for cervical chlamydial infection. N Engl J Med. 1996 May 23;334(21):1362–1366. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199605233342103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Stephenson J. M. Screening for genital chlamydial infection. Br Med Bull. 1998;54(4):891–902. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bmb.a011736. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Verhoeven V., Avonts D., Meheus A., Goossens H., Ieven M., Chapelle S., Lammens C., Van Royen P. Chlamydial infection: an accurate model for opportunistic screening in general practice. Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Aug;79(4):313–317. doi: 10.1136/sti.79.4.313. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Wilson J. S., Honey E., Templeton A., Paavonen J., Mårdh P. A., Stray-Pedersen B., EU Biomed Concerted Action Group A systematic review of the prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis among European women. Hum Reprod Update. 2002 Jul-Aug;8(4):385–394. doi: 10.1093/humupd/8.4.385. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. van Valkengoed I. G., Boeke A. J., van den Brule A. J., Morré S. A., Dekker J. H., Meijer C. J., van Eijk J. T. Systematische opsporing van infecties met Chlamydia trachomatis bij mannen en vrouwen zonder klachten in de huisartspraktijk met behulp van per post verstuurde urinemonsters. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1999 Mar 27;143(13):672–676. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. van Valkengoed I. G., Postma M. J., Morré S. A., van den Brule A. J., Meijer C. J., Bouter L. M., Boeke A. J. Cost effectiveness analysis of a population based screening programme for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections in women by means of home obtained urine specimens. Sex Transm Infect. 2001 Aug;77(4):276–282. doi: 10.1136/sti.77.4.276. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. van den Hoek J. A., Mulder-Folkerts D. K., Coutinho R. A., Dukers N. H., Buimer M., van Doornum G. J. Opportunistische screening op genitale infecties met Chlamydia trachomatis onder de seksueel actieve bevolking in Amsterdam. I. Meer dan 90% deelname en bijna 5% prevalentie. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1999 Mar 27;143(13):668–672. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Sexually Transmitted Infections are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES