Performance of a Vaginal Panel Assay Compared With the Clinical Diagnosis of Vaginitis
To compare the performance of vaginitis diagnosis based on clinical assessment to molecular detection of organisms associated with bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and Trichomonas vaginalis using a vaginal panel assay. This cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study included 489 enrolle...
Uloženo v:
| Vydáno v: | Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953) Ročník 138; číslo 6; s. 853 |
|---|---|
| Hlavní autoři: | , , , , , |
| Médium: | Journal Article |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Vydáno: |
United States
01.12.2021
|
| Témata: | |
| ISSN: | 1873-233X, 1873-233X |
| On-line přístup: | Zjistit podrobnosti o přístupu |
| Tagy: |
Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
|
| Abstract | To compare the performance of vaginitis diagnosis based on clinical assessment to molecular detection of organisms associated with bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and Trichomonas vaginalis using a vaginal panel assay.
This cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study included 489 enrolled participants from five collection sites where those with vaginitis symptoms had a vaginal assay swab collected during their visit and a clinical diagnosis made. The swab was later sent to a separate testing site to perform the vaginal panel assay. Outcome measures include positive, negative, and overall percent agreement (and accompanying 95% CIs) of clinical assessment with the vaginal panel assay. P<.05 was used to distinguish significant differences in paired proportions between the vaginal panel assay and clinical diagnosis, using the McNemar test. Inter-rater agreement between the two diagnostic approaches was determined using Cohen's kappa coefficient.
Clinical diagnosis had a positive percent agreement with the vaginal panel assay of 57.9% (95% CI 51.5-64.2%), 53.5% (95% CI 44.5-62.4%), and 28.0% (95% CI 12.1-49.4%) for bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and T vaginalis, respectively. Negative percent agreement for clinical diagnosis was 80.2% (95% CI 74.3-85.2%), 77.0% (95% CI 72.1-81.4%), and 99.8% (95% CI 98.7-99.9%), respectively. Sixty-five percent (67/103), 44% (26/59), and 56% (10/18) of patients identified as having bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and T vaginalis by assay, respectively, were not treated for vaginitis based on a negative clinical diagnosis. Compared with the assay, clinical diagnosis had false-positive rates of 19.8%, 23.0%, and 0.2% for bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and T vaginalis, respectively. Significant differences in paired proportions were observed between the vaginal panel assay and clinical diagnosis for detection of bacterial vaginosis and T vaginalis.
The vaginal panel assay could improve the diagnostic accuracy for vaginitis and facilitate appropriate and timely treatment.
Becton, Dickinson and Company. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | To compare the performance of vaginitis diagnosis based on clinical assessment to molecular detection of organisms associated with bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and Trichomonas vaginalis using a vaginal panel assay.OBJECTIVETo compare the performance of vaginitis diagnosis based on clinical assessment to molecular detection of organisms associated with bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and Trichomonas vaginalis using a vaginal panel assay.This cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study included 489 enrolled participants from five collection sites where those with vaginitis symptoms had a vaginal assay swab collected during their visit and a clinical diagnosis made. The swab was later sent to a separate testing site to perform the vaginal panel assay. Outcome measures include positive, negative, and overall percent agreement (and accompanying 95% CIs) of clinical assessment with the vaginal panel assay. P<.05 was used to distinguish significant differences in paired proportions between the vaginal panel assay and clinical diagnosis, using the McNemar test. Inter-rater agreement between the two diagnostic approaches was determined using Cohen's kappa coefficient.METHODSThis cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study included 489 enrolled participants from five collection sites where those with vaginitis symptoms had a vaginal assay swab collected during their visit and a clinical diagnosis made. The swab was later sent to a separate testing site to perform the vaginal panel assay. Outcome measures include positive, negative, and overall percent agreement (and accompanying 95% CIs) of clinical assessment with the vaginal panel assay. P<.05 was used to distinguish significant differences in paired proportions between the vaginal panel assay and clinical diagnosis, using the McNemar test. Inter-rater agreement between the two diagnostic approaches was determined using Cohen's kappa coefficient.Clinical diagnosis had a positive percent agreement with the vaginal panel assay of 57.9% (95% CI 51.5-64.2%), 53.5% (95% CI 44.5-62.4%), and 28.0% (95% CI 12.1-49.4%) for bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and T vaginalis, respectively. Negative percent agreement for clinical diagnosis was 80.2% (95% CI 74.3-85.2%), 77.0% (95% CI 72.1-81.4%), and 99.8% (95% CI 98.7-99.9%), respectively. Sixty-five percent (67/103), 44% (26/59), and 56% (10/18) of patients identified as having bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and T vaginalis by assay, respectively, were not treated for vaginitis based on a negative clinical diagnosis. Compared with the assay, clinical diagnosis had false-positive rates of 19.8%, 23.0%, and 0.2% for bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and T vaginalis, respectively. Significant differences in paired proportions were observed between the vaginal panel assay and clinical diagnosis for detection of bacterial vaginosis and T vaginalis.RESULTSClinical diagnosis had a positive percent agreement with the vaginal panel assay of 57.9% (95% CI 51.5-64.2%), 53.5% (95% CI 44.5-62.4%), and 28.0% (95% CI 12.1-49.4%) for bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and T vaginalis, respectively. Negative percent agreement for clinical diagnosis was 80.2% (95% CI 74.3-85.2%), 77.0% (95% CI 72.1-81.4%), and 99.8% (95% CI 98.7-99.9%), respectively. Sixty-five percent (67/103), 44% (26/59), and 56% (10/18) of patients identified as having bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and T vaginalis by assay, respectively, were not treated for vaginitis based on a negative clinical diagnosis. Compared with the assay, clinical diagnosis had false-positive rates of 19.8%, 23.0%, and 0.2% for bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and T vaginalis, respectively. Significant differences in paired proportions were observed between the vaginal panel assay and clinical diagnosis for detection of bacterial vaginosis and T vaginalis.The vaginal panel assay could improve the diagnostic accuracy for vaginitis and facilitate appropriate and timely treatment.CONCLUSIONThe vaginal panel assay could improve the diagnostic accuracy for vaginitis and facilitate appropriate and timely treatment.Becton, Dickinson and Company.FUNDING SOURCEBecton, Dickinson and Company. To compare the performance of vaginitis diagnosis based on clinical assessment to molecular detection of organisms associated with bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and Trichomonas vaginalis using a vaginal panel assay. This cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study included 489 enrolled participants from five collection sites where those with vaginitis symptoms had a vaginal assay swab collected during their visit and a clinical diagnosis made. The swab was later sent to a separate testing site to perform the vaginal panel assay. Outcome measures include positive, negative, and overall percent agreement (and accompanying 95% CIs) of clinical assessment with the vaginal panel assay. P<.05 was used to distinguish significant differences in paired proportions between the vaginal panel assay and clinical diagnosis, using the McNemar test. Inter-rater agreement between the two diagnostic approaches was determined using Cohen's kappa coefficient. Clinical diagnosis had a positive percent agreement with the vaginal panel assay of 57.9% (95% CI 51.5-64.2%), 53.5% (95% CI 44.5-62.4%), and 28.0% (95% CI 12.1-49.4%) for bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and T vaginalis, respectively. Negative percent agreement for clinical diagnosis was 80.2% (95% CI 74.3-85.2%), 77.0% (95% CI 72.1-81.4%), and 99.8% (95% CI 98.7-99.9%), respectively. Sixty-five percent (67/103), 44% (26/59), and 56% (10/18) of patients identified as having bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and T vaginalis by assay, respectively, were not treated for vaginitis based on a negative clinical diagnosis. Compared with the assay, clinical diagnosis had false-positive rates of 19.8%, 23.0%, and 0.2% for bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and T vaginalis, respectively. Significant differences in paired proportions were observed between the vaginal panel assay and clinical diagnosis for detection of bacterial vaginosis and T vaginalis. The vaginal panel assay could improve the diagnostic accuracy for vaginitis and facilitate appropriate and timely treatment. Becton, Dickinson and Company. |
| Author | Stonebraker, Elizabeth Broache, Molly Taylor, Stephanie N Cammarata, Catherine L Eckert, Karen Van Der Pol, Barbara |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Molly surname: Broache fullname: Broache, Molly organization: Becton, Dickinson and Company, BD Life Sciences - Integrated Diagnostic Solutions, Sparks, Maryland; the Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, Louisiana; and the University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama – sequence: 2 givenname: Catherine L surname: Cammarata fullname: Cammarata, Catherine L – sequence: 3 givenname: Elizabeth surname: Stonebraker fullname: Stonebraker, Elizabeth – sequence: 4 givenname: Karen surname: Eckert fullname: Eckert, Karen – sequence: 5 givenname: Barbara surname: Van Der Pol fullname: Van Der Pol, Barbara – sequence: 6 givenname: Stephanie N surname: Taylor fullname: Taylor, Stephanie N |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34736269$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNpNkMtOwzAQRS1URB_wBwh5ySYlGcdxvKxCKUiV2gUUdtHEmbRGeZQ4XfTvCVCk3s3cxTmj0YzZoG5qYuw28KeBr9XDbLWY-mcJpYYLNgpiJTwQ4mNw1ods7NxnDwWRFldsKEIlIoj0iG3W1BZNW2FtiDcFR77Bra2x5GusqeQz5_DIk6baY0s5f7fdjnc74klpa2t67NHitm6cdT_2r2s7667ZZYGlo5vTnLC3p_lr8uwtV4uXZLb0TChF5MmCFAZSZZkCiUZEQokcpMzJZFJQ7BdoAHUY-hoI8tg3mJmAwjjXOSgAmLD7v737tvk6kOvSyjpDZdkf3xxcClKHoKUvRI_endBDVlGe7ltbYXtM_38B33o9YtU |
| CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1016_j_idc_2023_02_002 crossref_primary_10_1097_AOG_0000000000005673 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_xagr_2025_100504 crossref_primary_10_1089_pop_2024_0133 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ogc_2022_07_004 crossref_primary_10_1128_spectrum_00235_24 crossref_primary_10_1097_OLQ_0000000000001820 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | Copyright © 2021 by The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: Copyright © 2021 by The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. |
| DBID | CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7X8 |
| DOI | 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004592 |
| DatabaseName | Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitle | MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE - Academic MEDLINE |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: 7X8 name: MEDLINE - Academic url: https://search.proquest.com/medline sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
| DeliveryMethod | no_fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Medicine |
| EISSN | 1873-233X |
| ExternalDocumentID | 34736269 |
| Genre | Multicenter Study Comparative Study Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Journal Article |
| GroupedDBID | --- .XZ .Z2 01R 0R~ 123 1J1 2CO 354 40H 4Q1 4Q2 4Q3 53G 5RE 5VS 77Y 7O~ 85S AAAAV AAAXR AACTN AAGIX AAHPQ AAIQE AAJCS AAMOA AAMTA AAQKA AARTV AASCR AASOK AASXQ AAUEB AAWTL AAXQO ABASU ABBUW ABDIG ABJNI ABVCZ ABXVJ ABZAD ACDDN ACEWG ACGFO ACGFS ACIJW ACILI ACLDA ACOAL ACWDW ACWRI ACXJB ACXNZ ADBBV ADGGA ADHPY AE3 AEBDS AENEX AFDTB AFEXH AFFNX AFSOK AFUWQ AGINI AHOMT AHQNM AHVBC AIJEX AINUH AJCLO AJIOK AJNWD AJZMW AKCTQ AKRWK AKULP ALKUP ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALMTX AMJPA AMKUR AMNEI AOHHW AWKKM BAWUL BOYCO BQLVK BYPQX C45 CGR CS3 CUY CVF DIWNM DU5 E.X EBS ECM EEVPB EIF ERAAH EX3 F2K F2L F2M F2N F5P FCALG FD6 FDB FL- FW0 GNXGY GQDEL H0~ HLJTE HZ~ IKREB IKYAY IN~ IPNFZ JF9 JG8 JK3 JK8 K-A K-F K8S KD2 KMI L-C L7B MZP N9A NEJ NPM N~7 N~B O9- OAG OAH OBH ODA ODMTH OHH OHYEH OJAPA OL1 OLB OLG OLH OLU OLV OLW OLY OLZ OPUJH OVD OVDNE OVIDH OVLEI OVOZU OWBYB OWU OWV OWX OWY OWZ OXXIT P2P RIG RLZ S4R S4S TEORI TSPGW TWZ UHB V2I VVN W3M WH7 WOQ WOW X3V X3W XXN XYM ZB8 ~S- 7X8 ABPXF ABXYN ABZZY ACBKD ACDOF ACZKN ADKSD ADSXY AFBFQ AFMBP AFNMH AHQVU AOQMC |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c4536-5fe7a157bb725ac36373d255decb53e80fac2a944092e2d80cabc1e48d9d27222 |
| IEDL.DBID | 7X8 |
| ISICitedReferencesCount | 14 |
| ISICitedReferencesURI | http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=00006250-202112000-00006&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| ISSN | 1873-233X |
| IngestDate | Sun Nov 09 10:40:32 EST 2025 Wed Feb 19 02:27:17 EST 2025 |
| IsDoiOpenAccess | false |
| IsOpenAccess | true |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Issue | 6 |
| Language | English |
| License | Copyright © 2021 by The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c4536-5fe7a157bb725ac36373d255decb53e80fac2a944092e2d80cabc1e48d9d27222 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 23 |
| OpenAccessLink | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC8594526 |
| PMID | 34736269 |
| PQID | 2594295033 |
| PQPubID | 23479 |
| ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_2594295033 pubmed_primary_34736269 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | 2021-December-01 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2021-12-01 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 12 year: 2021 text: 2021-December-01 day: 01 |
| PublicationDecade | 2020 |
| PublicationPlace | United States |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: United States |
| PublicationTitle | Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953) |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | Obstet Gynecol |
| PublicationYear | 2021 |
| SSID | ssj0001693 |
| Score | 2.4467466 |
| Snippet | To compare the performance of vaginitis diagnosis based on clinical assessment to molecular detection of organisms associated with bacterial vaginosis,... |
| SourceID | proquest pubmed |
| SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database |
| StartPage | 853 |
| SubjectTerms | Adolescent Adult Aged Biological Assay - statistics & numerical data Candidiasis, Vulvovaginal - diagnosis Candidiasis, Vulvovaginal - microbiology Cross-Sectional Studies Female Humans Middle Aged Physical Examination - statistics & numerical data Prospective Studies Reproducibility of Results Specimen Handling Trichomonas Vaginitis - diagnosis Trichomonas Vaginitis - microbiology Vagina - microbiology Vaginitis - diagnosis Vaginitis - microbiology Vaginosis, Bacterial - diagnosis Vaginosis, Bacterial - microbiology Young Adult |
| Title | Performance of a Vaginal Panel Assay Compared With the Clinical Diagnosis of Vaginitis |
| URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34736269 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2594295033 |
| Volume | 138 |
| WOSCitedRecordID | wos00006250-202112000-00006&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| hasFullText | |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1LS8QwEA7qinjx_VhfRPAabJu0aU-yrK4e3LUHXXtb8iouSLtaFfz3ZtIsexIEe-ipA-lkMvkmM_kGoQvKlKQ61oQHgSAsDA2RaRkQbTcnE2mmQ-V4Zu_5aJQWRZb7A7fGl1XOfaJz1LpWcEZ-aWG6dZ2QdLuavRHoGgXZVd9CYxl1qIUyYNW8WLCFA9EIBFwppySitJhfncv4Ze_htqUu9A-LXTL0F5DpNpvB5n-HuYU2PMzEvdYuttGSqXbQ2tAn0nfROF9cGMB1iQUeC9cgC-eiMlawacQ37vsCdfw8_XjBFipiTyP6iq_bEr1pA9JOFsiR9tDT4Oaxf0d8iwWiWEwTEpeGizDmUvIoFoomlFNtowxtlIypSYNSqEhkzEaBkZ26NFBCqtCwVGc64hZb7KOVqq7MIcLQ6S8JEyPhcyN1RktgQC610YFULO2i87nGJtaEIS9hf6j-bCYLnXXRQav2yazl2phQxoEwJzv6g_QxWo-g4sQVm5ygTmkXsDlFq-rLKuD9zNmGfY_y4Q8uL8Ia |
| linkProvider | ProQuest |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Performance+of+a+Vaginal+Panel+Assay+Compared+With+the+Clinical+Diagnosis+of+Vaginitis&rft.jtitle=Obstetrics+and+gynecology+%28New+York.+1953%29&rft.au=Broache%2C+Molly&rft.au=Cammarata%2C+Catherine+L&rft.au=Stonebraker%2C+Elizabeth&rft.au=Eckert%2C+Karen&rft.date=2021-12-01&rft.issn=1873-233X&rft.eissn=1873-233X&rft.volume=138&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=853&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097%2FAOG.0000000000004592&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1873-233X&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1873-233X&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1873-233X&client=summon |