Analysis of standard methods for diagnosing vaginitis

HIV infection does not complicate the diagnosis of vaginitis

Beverly E. Sha, Susan H. Gawel, Ronald C. Hershow, Douglas Passaro, Michael Augenbraun, Teresa M. Darragh, Alice Stek, Elizabeth Golub, Lorraine Cashin, Michael D. Moxley, Kathleen M. Weber, D. Heather Watts

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. We sought to determine whether the standard diagnostic methods for vaginitis behave similarly among HIV-infected and at-risk seronegative women. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We performed pairwise comparisons over time (1994-2003) for the different diagnostic methods for bacterial vaginosis (BV) (Nugent score and Amsel criteria), vulvovaginal candidiasis (potassium hydroxide smear and Pap smear), and trichomoniasis (culture, wet mount, and Pap smear) among HIV-infected and at-risk HIV seronegative women in the Women's Interagency HIV Study cohort. We stratified subjects by HIV status and among the HIV-infected women by CD4+ cell count strata. RESULTS. For BV and trichomoniasis, κ statistics comparing clinical diagnostic methods to laboratory-based methods improved after the first year. Significant differences in overall κ statistics between HIV-infected and at-risk HIV-seronegative women were found only for vulvovaginal candidiasis where potassium hydroxide smear and Pap smear findings were more tightly correlated among HIV-infected women than among at-risk HIV-seronegative women; among these HIV-infected women, concordance was highest at lower CD4 cell counts. No significant differences in κ statistics were found for the diagnostic methods of BV or trichomoniasis neither by HIV status nor CD4 cell count strata. CONCLUSIONS. The standard diagnostic tests for BV, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and trichomoniasis behave similarly in HIV-infected and at-risk seronegative women. Training and experience are critical for the accurate performance of the diagnostic methods that require clinician interpretation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)240-250
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Lower Genital Tract Disease
Volume11
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2007

Fingerprint

Vaginitis
HIV Infections
HIV
Bacterial Vaginosis
Vulvovaginal Candidiasis
Papanicolaou Test
CD4 Lymphocyte Count
Routine Diagnostic Tests

Keywords

  • Diagnosis
  • HIV infection
  • Vaginitis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Sha, B. E., Gawel, S. H., Hershow, R. C., Passaro, D., Augenbraun, M., Darragh, T. M., ... Watts, D. H. (2007). Analysis of standard methods for diagnosing vaginitis: HIV infection does not complicate the diagnosis of vaginitis. Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease, 11(4), 240-250. https://doi.org/10.1097/LGT.0b013e318033dfed

Analysis of standard methods for diagnosing vaginitis : HIV infection does not complicate the diagnosis of vaginitis. / Sha, Beverly E.; Gawel, Susan H.; Hershow, Ronald C.; Passaro, Douglas; Augenbraun, Michael; Darragh, Teresa M.; Stek, Alice; Golub, Elizabeth; Cashin, Lorraine; Moxley, Michael D.; Weber, Kathleen M.; Watts, D. Heather.

In: Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease, Vol. 11, No. 4, 10.2007, p. 240-250.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sha, BE, Gawel, SH, Hershow, RC, Passaro, D, Augenbraun, M, Darragh, TM, Stek, A, Golub, E, Cashin, L, Moxley, MD, Weber, KM & Watts, DH 2007, 'Analysis of standard methods for diagnosing vaginitis: HIV infection does not complicate the diagnosis of vaginitis', Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 240-250. https://doi.org/10.1097/LGT.0b013e318033dfed
Sha, Beverly E. ; Gawel, Susan H. ; Hershow, Ronald C. ; Passaro, Douglas ; Augenbraun, Michael ; Darragh, Teresa M. ; Stek, Alice ; Golub, Elizabeth ; Cashin, Lorraine ; Moxley, Michael D. ; Weber, Kathleen M. ; Watts, D. Heather. / Analysis of standard methods for diagnosing vaginitis : HIV infection does not complicate the diagnosis of vaginitis. In: Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease. 2007 ; Vol. 11, No. 4. pp. 240-250.
@article{11b71d9e661b4cdb8198acbb91a419f0,
title = "Analysis of standard methods for diagnosing vaginitis: HIV infection does not complicate the diagnosis of vaginitis",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE. We sought to determine whether the standard diagnostic methods for vaginitis behave similarly among HIV-infected and at-risk seronegative women. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We performed pairwise comparisons over time (1994-2003) for the different diagnostic methods for bacterial vaginosis (BV) (Nugent score and Amsel criteria), vulvovaginal candidiasis (potassium hydroxide smear and Pap smear), and trichomoniasis (culture, wet mount, and Pap smear) among HIV-infected and at-risk HIV seronegative women in the Women's Interagency HIV Study cohort. We stratified subjects by HIV status and among the HIV-infected women by CD4+ cell count strata. RESULTS. For BV and trichomoniasis, κ statistics comparing clinical diagnostic methods to laboratory-based methods improved after the first year. Significant differences in overall κ statistics between HIV-infected and at-risk HIV-seronegative women were found only for vulvovaginal candidiasis where potassium hydroxide smear and Pap smear findings were more tightly correlated among HIV-infected women than among at-risk HIV-seronegative women; among these HIV-infected women, concordance was highest at lower CD4 cell counts. No significant differences in κ statistics were found for the diagnostic methods of BV or trichomoniasis neither by HIV status nor CD4 cell count strata. CONCLUSIONS. The standard diagnostic tests for BV, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and trichomoniasis behave similarly in HIV-infected and at-risk seronegative women. Training and experience are critical for the accurate performance of the diagnostic methods that require clinician interpretation.",
keywords = "Diagnosis, HIV infection, Vaginitis",
author = "Sha, {Beverly E.} and Gawel, {Susan H.} and Hershow, {Ronald C.} and Douglas Passaro and Michael Augenbraun and Darragh, {Teresa M.} and Alice Stek and Elizabeth Golub and Lorraine Cashin and Moxley, {Michael D.} and Weber, {Kathleen M.} and Watts, {D. Heather}",
year = "2007",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1097/LGT.0b013e318033dfed",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "240--250",
journal = "Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease",
issn = "1089-2591",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Analysis of standard methods for diagnosing vaginitis

T2 - HIV infection does not complicate the diagnosis of vaginitis

AU - Sha, Beverly E.

AU - Gawel, Susan H.

AU - Hershow, Ronald C.

AU - Passaro, Douglas

AU - Augenbraun, Michael

AU - Darragh, Teresa M.

AU - Stek, Alice

AU - Golub, Elizabeth

AU - Cashin, Lorraine

AU - Moxley, Michael D.

AU - Weber, Kathleen M.

AU - Watts, D. Heather

PY - 2007/10

Y1 - 2007/10

N2 - OBJECTIVE. We sought to determine whether the standard diagnostic methods for vaginitis behave similarly among HIV-infected and at-risk seronegative women. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We performed pairwise comparisons over time (1994-2003) for the different diagnostic methods for bacterial vaginosis (BV) (Nugent score and Amsel criteria), vulvovaginal candidiasis (potassium hydroxide smear and Pap smear), and trichomoniasis (culture, wet mount, and Pap smear) among HIV-infected and at-risk HIV seronegative women in the Women's Interagency HIV Study cohort. We stratified subjects by HIV status and among the HIV-infected women by CD4+ cell count strata. RESULTS. For BV and trichomoniasis, κ statistics comparing clinical diagnostic methods to laboratory-based methods improved after the first year. Significant differences in overall κ statistics between HIV-infected and at-risk HIV-seronegative women were found only for vulvovaginal candidiasis where potassium hydroxide smear and Pap smear findings were more tightly correlated among HIV-infected women than among at-risk HIV-seronegative women; among these HIV-infected women, concordance was highest at lower CD4 cell counts. No significant differences in κ statistics were found for the diagnostic methods of BV or trichomoniasis neither by HIV status nor CD4 cell count strata. CONCLUSIONS. The standard diagnostic tests for BV, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and trichomoniasis behave similarly in HIV-infected and at-risk seronegative women. Training and experience are critical for the accurate performance of the diagnostic methods that require clinician interpretation.

AB - OBJECTIVE. We sought to determine whether the standard diagnostic methods for vaginitis behave similarly among HIV-infected and at-risk seronegative women. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We performed pairwise comparisons over time (1994-2003) for the different diagnostic methods for bacterial vaginosis (BV) (Nugent score and Amsel criteria), vulvovaginal candidiasis (potassium hydroxide smear and Pap smear), and trichomoniasis (culture, wet mount, and Pap smear) among HIV-infected and at-risk HIV seronegative women in the Women's Interagency HIV Study cohort. We stratified subjects by HIV status and among the HIV-infected women by CD4+ cell count strata. RESULTS. For BV and trichomoniasis, κ statistics comparing clinical diagnostic methods to laboratory-based methods improved after the first year. Significant differences in overall κ statistics between HIV-infected and at-risk HIV-seronegative women were found only for vulvovaginal candidiasis where potassium hydroxide smear and Pap smear findings were more tightly correlated among HIV-infected women than among at-risk HIV-seronegative women; among these HIV-infected women, concordance was highest at lower CD4 cell counts. No significant differences in κ statistics were found for the diagnostic methods of BV or trichomoniasis neither by HIV status nor CD4 cell count strata. CONCLUSIONS. The standard diagnostic tests for BV, vulvovaginal candidiasis, and trichomoniasis behave similarly in HIV-infected and at-risk seronegative women. Training and experience are critical for the accurate performance of the diagnostic methods that require clinician interpretation.

KW - Diagnosis

KW - HIV infection

KW - Vaginitis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34948891510&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34948891510&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/LGT.0b013e318033dfed

DO - 10.1097/LGT.0b013e318033dfed

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - 240

EP - 250

JO - Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease

JF - Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease

SN - 1089-2591

IS - 4

ER -