Original Article

High Frequencies of Negative Pretreatment Results Following Presumptive Antibiotic Treatment for Chlamydia and Gonorrhea

Authors: Belma Andric, MD, MPH, Joanna Drowos, DO, MPH, Mary Jo Trepka, MD, MSPH, Gabriel Suciu, PhD, Alina Alonso, MD, Charles H. Hennekens, MD, DrPH

Abstract

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to determine the frequencies of negative test results among all patients aged 18 years and older receiving presumptive antibiotic treatment for chlamydia and/or gonorrhea at the Sexually Transmitted Disease Clinic of the Palm Beach County Health Department. The treatment algorithms were based on guidelines of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.


Methods: Clinic logs were retrospectively reviewed for a consecutive case series of all 1209 patients treated from November 1, 2007 to October 31, 2008. Urogenital specimens were collected and analyzed. Laboratory results were obtained from the Health Management System of the Palm Beach County Health Department.


Results: Of the 1209 patients, 556 (46%) were treated for chlamydia, 30 (2.5%) for gonorrhea, and 623 (51.5%) for both. The frequencies of negative results were 68% for chlamydia or gonorrhea, 70.9% for chlamydia, 86.6% for gonorrhea, and 65.2% for chlamydia + gonorrhea.


Conclusions: These data indicate that implementation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines by the Sexually Transmitted Disease Clinic of the Palm Beach County Health Department results in presumptive treatment of more than two-thirds of patients with negative nucleic acid amplification test results for chlamydia, gonorrhea, or both. They also suggest the potential value of developing treatment algorithms to maximize treatment of patients with positive test results and minimize treatment of those with negative test results. One possible strategy to explore is the future utility of new testing and treatment methodologies in development.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexually transmitted diseases treatment guidelines, 2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2010; 59: 1–110.
 
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2009 Sexually transmitted diseases surveillance. http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats09/toc.htm. Accessed December 1, 2012.
 
3. Florida Department of Health, Office of Health Statistics and Assessment. Florida STD trends. http://www.doh.state.fl.us/disease_ctrl/std/trends/florida.html. Accessed December 2, 2012.
 
4. Stamm WE. Chlamydia trachomatis infections of the adult. In: Holmes KK, Sparling PF, Stamm WE, et al., eds. Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008, 575–595.
 
5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexually transmitted diseases treatment guidelines, 2006. MMWR Recomm Rep 2006; 55: 1–94.
 
6. Johnson RE, Newhall WJ, Papp JR, et al.. Screening tests to detect Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections—2002. MMWR Recomm Rep 2002; 51: 1–38.
 
7. Finelli L, Nakashima AK, Hillis S, et al.. Selective screening versus presumptive treatment criteria for identification of women with chlamydial infection in public clinics: New Jersey. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 174: 1527–1533.
 
8. Schwebke JR, Sadler R, Sutton JM, et al.. Positive screening tests for gonorrhea and chlamydial infection fail to lead consistently to treatment of patients attending a sexually transmitted disease clinic. Sex Transm Dis 1997; 24: 181–184.
 
9. Levitt MA, Johnson S, Engelstad L, et al.. Clinical management of chlamydia and gonorrhea infection in a county teaching emergency department—concerns in overtreatment, undertreatment, and follow-up treatment success. J Emerg Med 2003; 25: 7–11.
 
10. Faricy L, Page T, Ronick M, et al.. Patterns of empiric treatment of Chlamydia tracomatis infections in an underserved population. Fam Med 2012; 44: 408–415.
 
11. Burnett AM, Anderson CP, Zwank MD. Laboratory-confirmed gonorrhea and/or chlamydia rates in clinically diagnosed pelvic inflammatory disease and cervicitis. Am J Emerg Med 2012; 30: 1114–1117.
 
12. Kane BG, Degutis LC, Sayward HK, et al.. Compliance with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of sexually transmitted diseases. Acad Emerg Med 2004; 11: 371–374.
 
13. Swain GR, McDonald RA, Pfister JR, et al.. Decision analysis: point-of-care chlamydia testing vs. laboratory-based methods. Clin Med Res 2004; 2: 29–35.
 
14. Mabey D, Peeling RW, Perkins MD. Rapid and simple point of care diagnostics for STIs. Sex Transm Infect 2001; 77: 397–398.
 
15. Mahilum-Tapay L, Laitila V, Wawrzyniak JJ, et al.. New point of care Chlamydia Rapid Test—bridging the gap between diagnosis and treatment: performance evaluation study. BMJ 2007; 335: 1190–1194.