Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Infectious Diseases in Obstetrics and Gynecology logoLink to Infectious Diseases in Obstetrics and Gynecology
. 1998;6(5):204–208. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-0997(1998)6:5<204::AID-IDOG3>3.0.CO;2-R

Gram stain method shows better sensitivity than clinical criteria for detection of bacterial vaginosis in surveillance of pregnant, low-income women in a clinical setting.

M T Tam 1, M Yungbluth 1, T Myles 1
PMCID: PMC1784815  PMID: 9894174

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study is to determine whether the Gram stain method is superior to the clinical criteria for the diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis in low-income pregnant women seen in a resident clinic setting. The clinical criteria is the current diagnostic method employed to diagnose bacterial vaginosis. STUDY DESIGN: In this study, 51 pregnant women with vaginal discharge were prospectively evaluated. All were screened using the clinical criteria, Gram stain method, and culture of the discharge. The modified scoring system instituted by Nugent et al. (J Clin Microbiol 29:297-301, 1991) was employed in reading the Gram stain smears. The clinical criteria were then compared with the Gram stain method. Isolation of moderate to many Gardnerella vaginalis growth by culture was used as the confirmatory finding. RESULTS: Sensitivity of the Gram stain method (91%) was significantly higher than that of the clinical criteria (46%), (sign test P = 0.0023, < 0.01). The Gram stain method also has both a low false-negative (4%) and high negative predictive value (96%), making it an ideal diagnostic test. CONCLUSION: The Gram stain method is a rapid and cost-effective test that is also highly reproducible and readily available in many laboratories. These features make the Gram stain method a more desirable screening procedure for bacterial vaginosis in a clinic population.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (402.1 KB).

Selected References

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

  1. Eschenbach D. A. Bacterial vaginosis and anaerobes in obstetric-gynecologic infection. Clin Infect Dis. 1993 Jun;16 (Suppl 4):S282–S287. doi: 10.1093/clinids/16.supplement_4.s282. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Hauth J. C., Goldenberg R. L., Andrews W. W., DuBard M. B., Copper R. L. Reduced incidence of preterm delivery with metronidazole and erythromycin in women with bacterial vaginosis. N Engl J Med. 1995 Dec 28;333(26):1732–1736. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199512283332603. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Hillier S. L., Nugent R. P., Eschenbach D. A., Krohn M. A., Gibbs R. S., Martin D. H., Cotch M. F., Edelman R., Pastorek J. G., 2nd, Rao A. V. Association between bacterial vaginosis and preterm delivery of a low-birth-weight infant. The Vaginal Infections and Prematurity Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1995 Dec 28;333(26):1737–1742. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199512283332604. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Holst E., Goffeng A. R., Andersch B. Bacterial vaginosis and vaginal microorganisms in idiopathic premature labor and association with pregnancy outcome. J Clin Microbiol. 1994 Jan;32(1):176–186. doi: 10.1128/jcm.32.1.176-186.1994. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Joesoef M. R., Hillier S. L., Josodiwondo S., Linnan M. Reproducibility of a scoring system for gram stain diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis. J Clin Microbiol. 1991 Aug;29(8):1730–1731. doi: 10.1128/jcm.29.8.1730-1731.1991. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Krohn M. A., Hillier S. L., Eschenbach D. A. Comparison of methods for diagnosing bacterial vaginosis among pregnant women. J Clin Microbiol. 1989 Jun;27(6):1266–1271. doi: 10.1128/jcm.27.6.1266-1271.1989. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Kurki T., Sivonen A., Renkonen O. V., Savia E., Ylikorkala O. Bacterial vaginosis in early pregnancy and pregnancy outcome. Obstet Gynecol. 1992 Aug;80(2):173–177. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Martius J., Eschenbach D. A. The role of bacterial vaginosis as a cause of amniotic fluid infection, chorioamnionitis and prematurity--a review. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 1990;247(1):1–13. doi: 10.1007/BF02390649. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Martius J., Krohn M. A., Hillier S. L., Stamm W. E., Holmes K. K., Eschenbach D. A. Relationships of vaginal Lactobacillus species, cervical Chlamydia trachomatis, and bacterial vaginosis to preterm birth. Obstet Gynecol. 1988 Jan;71(1):89–95. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Mazzulli T., Simor A. E., Low D. E. Reproducibility of interpretation of Gram-stained vaginal smears for the diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis. J Clin Microbiol. 1990 Jul;28(7):1506–1508. doi: 10.1128/jcm.28.7.1506-1508.1990. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. McDonald H. M., O'Loughlin J. A., Vigneswaran R., Jolley P. T., Harvey J. A., Bof A., McDonald P. J. Impact of metronidazole therapy on preterm birth in women with bacterial vaginosis flora (Gardnerella vaginalis): a randomised, placebo controlled trial. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997 Dec;104(12):1391–1397. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb11009.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Minkoff H., Grunebaum A. N., Schwarz R. H., Feldman J., Cummings M., Crombleholme W., Clark L., Pringle G., McCormack W. M. Risk factors for prematurity and premature rupture of membranes: a prospective study of the vaginal flora in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1984 Dec 15;150(8):965–972. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(84)90392-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. 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]
  14. Rosenstein I. J., Morgan D. J., Sheehan M., Lamont R. F., Taylor-Robinson D. Bacterial vaginosis in pregnancy: distribution of bacterial species in different gram-stain categories of the vaginal flora. J Med Microbiol. 1996 Aug;45(2):120–126. doi: 10.1099/00222615-45-2-120. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Schwebke J. R., Hillier S. L., Sobel J. D., McGregor J. A., Sweet R. L. Validity of the vaginal gram stain for the diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis. Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Oct;88(4 Pt 1):573–576. doi: 10.1016/0029-7844(96)00233-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. 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]
  17. Spiegel C. A. Bacterial vaginosis. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1991 Oct;4(4):485–502. doi: 10.1128/cmr.4.4.485. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Thomason J. L., Gelbart S. M., Wilcoski L. M., Peterson A. K., Jilly B. J., Hamilton P. R. Proline aminopeptidase activity as a rapid diagnostic test to confirm bacterial vaginosis. Obstet Gynecol. 1988 Apr;71(4):607–611. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Watts D. H., Krohn M. A., Hillier S. L., Eschenbach D. A. Bacterial vaginosis as a risk factor for post-cesarean endometritis. Obstet Gynecol. 1990 Jan;75(1):52–58. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Infectious Diseases in Obstetrics and Gynecology are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES