Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2001 Aug;39(8):2924-7.
doi: 10.1128/JCM.39.8.2924-2927.2001.

Evaluation of laboratory testing methods for Chlamydia trachomatis infection in the era of nucleic acid amplification

Affiliations

Evaluation of laboratory testing methods for Chlamydia trachomatis infection in the era of nucleic acid amplification

T J Battle et al. J Clin Microbiol. 2001 Aug.

Abstract

Diagnostic tests presently available for Chlamydia trachomatis have widely varying performance characteristics. To assess evolving laboratory testing practices since the introduction of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT), we surveyed laboratories in Washington State about their testing practices in 1998 and compared our findings to a similar survey conducted in 1995. Laboratory directors of 61 (87%) of 70 laboratories performing chlamydial tests in 1998 returned a survey. Between 1995 and 1998, 36 laboratories discontinued chlamydial testing, and the total number of laboratories performing tests in the state decreased from 92 to 70, a 24% decline. Of the 36 laboratories that discontinued testing, 25 (69%) had previously used rapid tests. While no laboratory routinely used NAAT in 1995, ligase chain reaction (LCR) was used in 23% of laboratories in 1998 and accounted for 113,624 (36%) of the 318,133 tests performed that year. Among the remaining 204,509 tests performed in 1998, other tests employed included DNA probe (29%), enzyme immunoassay (20%), culture (12%), direct fluorescent antibody assays (3%), and rapid tests (<1%). The majority (65%) of tests performed in 1998 using technologies other than LCR or culture were done in laboratories that did more than 10,000 tests. Cost and loss of revenue to laboratories were the most frequently cited reasons for not adopting NAAT. We conclude that in Washington State, NAAT have been rapidly adopted in larger laboratories, but most patients are still tested with much less sensitive technologies. Financial constraints represent the major barrier to more widespread use of DNA amplification tests.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Black C M. Current methods of laboratory diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infections. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1997;10:160–184. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Recommendations for the prevention and management of Chlamydia trachomatis infections, 1993. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1993;42(RR-12):1–39. - PubMed
    1. Dean D, Ferrero D, McCarthy M. Comparison of performance and cost-effectiveness of direct fluorescent-antibody, ligase chain reaction, and PCR assays for verification of chlamydial enzyme immunoassay results for populations with a low to moderate prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infection. J Clin Microbiol. 1998;36:94–99. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Division of STD Prevention. Sexually transmitted disease surveillance, 1999. Atlanta, Ga: Department of Health and Human Services. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2000.
    1. Gift T L, Pate M S, Hook E W, 3rd, Kassler W J. The rapid test paradox: when fewer cases detected lead to more cases treated: a decision analysis of tests for Chlamydia trachomatis. Sex Transm Dis. 1999;26:232–240. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms