4.1 Article

Cross-Sectional Study of Genital, Rectal, and Pharyngeal Chlamydia and Gonorrhea in Women in Rural South Africa

期刊

SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES
卷 41, 期 9, 页码 564-569

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000175

关键词

-

资金

  1. Dutch Society for Tropical Medicine (NVTG), the Netherlands
  2. TubaScan Ltd., Beverwijk, the Netherlands
  3. US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief program via the US Agency for International Development [AID-674-A-12-00015]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Epidemiological data of genital chlamydia and gonorrhea, required to inform design and implementation of control programs, are limited for rural Africa. There are no data on the prevalence of rectal or pharyngeal infections among African women. Methods: A cross-sectional study of 604 adult women visiting 25 primary health care facilities in rural South Africa was conducted. Vaginal, anorectal, and oropharyngeal swabs were tested for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae. Results: Prevalence of genital chlamydia was 16% and that of gonorrhea was 10%; rectal chlamydial infection was diagnosed in 7.1% and gonococcal in 2.5% of women. One woman had pharyngeal chlamydia. Most women with genital chlamydia (61%) and gonorrhea (57%) were asymptomatic. Independent risk factors for genital chlamydia were younger age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.96 per year; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-0.98), hormonal contraceptive use (aOR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.3-3.7), pregnancy (aOR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.3-4.4), and intravaginal cleansing (aOR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.04-2.8). Intravaginal cleansing was associated with genital gonorrhea (aOR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.3). Conclusions: Genital and rectal, but not pharyngeal, chlamydia and gonorrhea are highly prevalent and frequently asymptomatic in women in rural South Africa. Young women attending health care facilities for antenatal care or family planning should be prioritized in control efforts.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据