Wilbanks Morgan D, Galbraith James W, Geisler William M
University of Alabama at Birmingham, School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama.
University of Alabama at Birmingham, Department of Emergency Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama.
West J Emerg Med. 2014 Mar;15(2):227-30. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2013.12.18989.
The clinical presentation of genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection (chlamydia) in women is often indistinguishable from a urinary tract infection. While merited in the setting of dysuria, emergency department (ED) clinicians do not routinely test for chlamydia in women. The primary aim of our study was to evaluate the frequency of chlamydia testing among women presenting to the ED with dysuria.
We conducted a retrospective chart review of women 19-25 years of age presenting with dysuria to an urban ED and who had been coded with urinary tract infection (UTI) as their primary diagnosis (ICD-9 599.0) from October 2005 to March 2011. We excluded women who were pregnant, had underlying anatomical or neurological urinary system pathology, had continuation of symptoms from UTI or a sexually transmitted infection (STI) diagnosed elsewhere, or were already on antibiotics for a UTI or STI. We identified the rates of sexual history screening, pelvic examination and chlamydia assay testing and evaluated predictors using univariate and multivariate analyses.
Of 280 women with dysuria and a UTI diagnosis, 17% were asked about their sexual history, with 94% reporting recent sexual activity. Pelvic examination was performed in 23%. We were unable to determine the overall chlamydia prevalence as only 20% of women in the cohort were tested. Among the 20% of women tested for chlamydia infection, 21% tested positive. Only 42% of chlamydia-positive women were prescribed treatment effective for chlamydia (azithromycin or doxycycline) at their visit; the remaining were prescribed UTI treatment not effective against chlamydia. Predictors of sexual history screening included vaginal bleeding (OR 5.4, 95% CI=1.5 to 19.6) and discharge (OR 2.8, 95% CI=1.1 to 6.9). Predictors of a pelvic examination being performed included having a complaint of vaginal discharge (OR 11.8, 95% CI=4.2 to 32.9), a sexual history performed (OR 2.5, 95% CI=1.1 to 5.8), abdominal pain (OR 2.2, 95% CI=1.1 to 4.4), or pelvic pain (OR 15.3, 95% CI=2.5 to 92.2); a complaint of urinary frequency was associated with a pelvic examination not being performed (OR 0.34, 95% CI=0.13 to 0.86).
Sexual histories, pelvic examinations, and chlamydia testing were not performed in the majority of women presenting with dysuria and diagnosed with UTI in the ED. The performance of a sexual history along with the availability of self-administered vaginal swab and first-void urine-based chlamydia tests may increase identification of chlamydia infection in women with dysuria.
女性生殖道沙眼衣原体感染(衣原体感染)的临床表现通常与尿路感染难以区分。虽然在出现排尿困难的情况下进行检测是合理的,但急诊科(ED)临床医生通常不会对女性进行衣原体检测。我们研究的主要目的是评估因排尿困难到急诊科就诊的女性中衣原体检测的频率。
我们对2005年10月至2011年3月期间因排尿困难到城市急诊科就诊、主要诊断为尿路感染(UTI,国际疾病分类第九版编码599.0)的19至25岁女性进行了回顾性病历审查。我们排除了怀孕、有潜在解剖学或神经学泌尿系统病变、尿路感染症状持续或在其他地方诊断为性传播感染(STI)的女性,或已因尿路感染或性传播感染正在使用抗生素的女性。我们确定了性病史筛查、盆腔检查和衣原体检测的比例,并使用单因素和多因素分析评估预测因素。
在280例诊断为排尿困难和尿路感染的女性中,17%被询问了性病史,其中94%报告近期有性活动。23%进行了盆腔检查。由于该队列中只有20%的女性进行了检测,我们无法确定衣原体的总体患病率。在接受衣原体感染检测的20%女性中,21%检测呈阳性。在衣原体检测呈阳性的女性中,只有42%在就诊时被开了对衣原体有效的治疗药物(阿奇霉素或多西环素);其余的被开了对衣原体无效的尿路感染治疗药物。性病史筛查的预测因素包括阴道出血(比值比[OR]5.4,95%置信区间[CI]=1.5至19.6)和分泌物(OR 2.8,95% CI=1.1至6.9)。进行盆腔检查的预测因素包括有阴道分泌物主诉(OR 11.8,95% CI=4.2至32.9)、进行了性病史询问(OR 2.5,95% CI=1.1至5.8)、腹痛(OR 2.2,95% CI=1.1至4.4)或盆腔疼痛(OR 15.3,95% CI=2.5至92.2);尿频主诉与未进行盆腔检查相关(OR 0.34,95% CI=0.13至0.86)。
在急诊科,大多数因排尿困难就诊且诊断为尿路感染的女性未进行性病史询问、盆腔检查和衣原体检测。询问性病史以及提供自行采集的阴道拭子和基于首次晨尿的衣原体检测可能会增加对排尿困难女性衣原体感染的识别。