We have located links that may give you full text access.
Evaluation Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Evaluation of a rapid point-of-care test for the detection of gonococcal infection among female sex workers in Benin.
Sexually Transmitted Infections 2006 December
OBJECTIVES: To assess the validity of the PATH (Seattle, Washington, USA) GC-Check rapid test, a point-of-care immunochromatographic strip test, in the detection of gonococcal infection among female sex workers (FSWs) in Benin.
METHODS: Women consulting consecutively at two FSW-dedicated clinics in Cotonou and Porto Novo (Benin) were recruited over three, 1-month periods between October 2003 and July 2004. After written informed consent, participants were administered a short interview and underwent a speculum examination where two cervical swabs were collected (in a subset of women, a vaginal swab was also collected). One cervical swab and the vaginal swab were immediately tested with the rapid test. The other cervical swab was frozen at -20 degrees C for at most four weeks and then transported to Québec (Canada), where it was tested with the Roche Amplicor CT/NG PCR assay. Samples positive for gonococcal infection were confirmed using a 16SrRNA PCR assay.
RESULTS: 1084 FSWs (median age 29 years) participated in the study, of whom 50 (4.6%) had a confirmed gonococcal infection. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the rapid test on cervical samples were 70.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 55.4% to 82.1%), 97.2% (95% CI 96.0% to 98.1%), 54.7% and 98.5%, respectively. The sensitivity of the rapid test on vaginal swabs among 759 women (37 positives for gonococcal infection) was significantly lower than with the cervical swab (54.1%, p = 0.008), whereas the specificity was comparable (98.2%, p = 0.13).
CONCLUSIONS: The PATH GC-Check test may be as efficient as a gold standard polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test for treating gonococcal infection when taking into account the proportion of women who do not return for their test results. In clinics serving populations with moderate prevalence of this infection, it could significantly reduce over-treatment compared to the syndromic approach.
METHODS: Women consulting consecutively at two FSW-dedicated clinics in Cotonou and Porto Novo (Benin) were recruited over three, 1-month periods between October 2003 and July 2004. After written informed consent, participants were administered a short interview and underwent a speculum examination where two cervical swabs were collected (in a subset of women, a vaginal swab was also collected). One cervical swab and the vaginal swab were immediately tested with the rapid test. The other cervical swab was frozen at -20 degrees C for at most four weeks and then transported to Québec (Canada), where it was tested with the Roche Amplicor CT/NG PCR assay. Samples positive for gonococcal infection were confirmed using a 16SrRNA PCR assay.
RESULTS: 1084 FSWs (median age 29 years) participated in the study, of whom 50 (4.6%) had a confirmed gonococcal infection. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the rapid test on cervical samples were 70.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 55.4% to 82.1%), 97.2% (95% CI 96.0% to 98.1%), 54.7% and 98.5%, respectively. The sensitivity of the rapid test on vaginal swabs among 759 women (37 positives for gonococcal infection) was significantly lower than with the cervical swab (54.1%, p = 0.008), whereas the specificity was comparable (98.2%, p = 0.13).
CONCLUSIONS: The PATH GC-Check test may be as efficient as a gold standard polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test for treating gonococcal infection when taking into account the proportion of women who do not return for their test results. In clinics serving populations with moderate prevalence of this infection, it could significantly reduce over-treatment compared to the syndromic approach.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app