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
Multicenter Study
. 2003 Feb;79(1):22-7.
doi: 10.1136/sti.79.1.22.

Opportunistic screening for genital chlamydial infection. II: prevalence among healthcare attenders, outcome, and evaluation of positive cases

J M Pimenta  1 , M Catchpole, P A Rogers, J Hopwood, S Randall, H Mallinson, E Perkins, N Jackson, C Carlisle, G Hewitt, G Underhill, T Gleave, L McLean, A Ghosh, J Tobin, V Harindra
Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Opportunistic screening for genital chlamydial infection. II: prevalence among healthcare attenders, outcome, and evaluation of positive cases

J M Pimenta et al. Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Feb.

Erratum in

  • Sex Transm Infect. 2004 Apr;80(2):156

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the prevalence and treatment outcomes among young women screened opportunistically for genital Chlamydia trachomatis and to evaluate the impact of screening in those participating.

Design: An opportunistic screening programme (1 September 1999 to 31 August 2000) using urine samples, tested by ligase chain reaction (LCR). In-depth interviews were used for programme evaluation.

Setting: Screening was offered in two health authorities at general practice, family planning, genitourinary medicine (GUM), adolescent sexual health, termination of pregnancy clinics and women's services in hospitals (antenatal, colposcopy, gynaecology and infertility clinics). Main participants: Sexually active women (16-24 years) attending for any reason.

Main outcome measures: Screening data: prevalence of infection by age and healthcare setting; proportion of positive patients attending for treatment. Evaluation data: participants' attitudes and views towards screening and follow up.

Results: In total, 16 930 women (16-24 years) were screened. Prevalence was higher in younger women (16-20) than those aged 21-24 years and was highly variable at different healthcare settings (range 3.4%-17.6%). Prevalence was approximately 9% in general practice. The role of the project health advisers in managing results and coordinating treatment of positive individuals was essential; the vast majority of all positives were known to be treated. Women felt that screening was beneficial. Improving awareness and education about sexually transmitted infections is required to alleviate negative reactions associated with testing positive for infection.

Conclusions: Prevalence of infection outside GUM clinics is substantial and opportunistic screening using urine samples is an acceptable method of reaching individuals with infection who do not normally present at specialist clinics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Recent pilot studies of chlamydia screening.
    Stephenson J, Hopwood J, Babiker A, Copas A, Vickers M. Stephenson J, et al. Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Aug;79(4):352. doi: 10.1136/sti.79.4.352-a. Sex Transm Infect. 2003. PMID: 12902608 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
  • Notice of redundant publication.
    Miller R, Ward H, Catchpole M, Underhill G, Hewitt G, Randall S, Tobin J, Harindra V. Miller R, et al. Sex Transm Infect. 2004 Aug;80(4):254. Sex Transm Infect. 2004. PMID: 15295120 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

References

    1. BJOG. 2000 Sep;107(9):1088-93 - PubMed
    1. Br J Fam Plann. 2000 Oct;26(4):199-201 - PubMed
    1. BMJ. 2001 Jan 27;322(7280):195-9 - PubMed
    1. Sex Transm Infect. 2000 Dec;76(6):493-4 - PubMed
    1. BMJ. 2001 May 19;322(7296):1245 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms