Abstract
Objective: To determine the methods used by genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinics in the United Kingdom for the diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis (BV).
Methods: A questionnaire survey of UK GUM clinics was conducted.
Results: 148/221 (67%) clinics returned a questionnaire. 96/148 (64.9%) clinics reported using Amsel's criteria to diagnose BV but only 29 (30.5%) of these used all four of the composite criteria. 139/148 (93.9%) clinics used the appearance of a Gram stained vaginal smear as an aid in BV diagnosis, although a variety of scoring methods was employed. In the majority of clinics, 92/148 (62.2%), one staff discipline provided the microscopy service, in 50 (33.8%) clinics two staff disciplines provided microscopy services. The bulk of microscopy services within UK GUM clinics is provided by nurses.
Conclusions: Most UK GUM clinics utilise the appearance of a Gram stained vaginal smear for the diagnosis of BV although there is little consensus at present about the type of scoring method employed. Adaptation of a uniform scoring method would have enormous benefits, including consistency and reproducibility of results and the development of quality assurance schemes for BV diagnosis on a national basis. There are important issues to be addressed regarding the initial training and ongoing support for nurses providing microscopy services within UK GUM clinics.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (49.8 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Amsel R., Totten P. A., Spiegel C. A., Chen K. C., Eschenbach D., Holmes K. K. Nonspecific vaginitis. Diagnostic criteria and microbial and epidemiologic associations. Am J Med. 1983 Jan;74(1):14–22. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(83)91112-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Eschenbach D. A., Hillier S., Critchlow C., Stevens C., DeRouen T., Holmes K. K. Diagnosis and clinical manifestations of bacterial vaginosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1988 Apr;158(4):819–828. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(88)90078-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Forsum U., Jakobsson T., Larsson P. G., Schmidt H., Beverly A., Bjørnerem A., Carlsson B., Csango P., Donders G., Hay P. An international study of the interobserver variation between interpretations of vaginal smear criteria of bacterial vaginosis. APMIS. 2002 Nov;110(11):811–818. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0463.2002.1101107.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- GARDNER H. L., DUKES C. D. Haemophilus vaginalis vaginitis: a newly defined specific infection previously classified non-specific vaginitis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1955 May;69(5):962–976. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hay P. E., Lamont R. F., Taylor-Robinson D., Morgan D. J., Ison C., Pearson J. Abnormal bacterial colonisation of the genital tract and subsequent preterm delivery and late miscarriage. BMJ. 1994 Jan 29;308(6924):295–298. doi: 10.1136/bmj.308.6924.295. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ison C. A., Hay P. E. Validation of a simplified grading of Gram stained vaginal smears for use in genitourinary medicine clinics. Sex Transm Infect. 2002 Dec;78(6):413–415. doi: 10.1136/sti.78.6.413. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Nugent R. P., Krohn M. A., Hillier S. L. Reliability of diagnosing bacterial vaginosis is improved by a standardized method of gram stain interpretation. J Clin Microbiol. 1991 Feb;29(2):297–301. doi: 10.1128/jcm.29.2.297-301.1991. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Spiegel C. A., Amsel R., Holmes K. K. Diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis by direct gram stain of vaginal fluid. J Clin Microbiol. 1983 Jul;18(1):170–177. doi: 10.1128/jcm.18.1.170-177.1983. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Totten P. A., Amsel R., Hale J., Piot P., Holmes K. K. Selective differential human blood bilayer media for isolation of Gardnerella (Haemophilus) vaginalis. J Clin Microbiol. 1982 Jan;15(1):141–147. doi: 10.1128/jcm.15.1.141-147.1982. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]