<i>Chlamydia</i> Screening: Expanding the Scope
Authors: Walter E. Stamm
Journal: Annals of Internal Medicine (2004)

Editorials5 October 2004Chlamydia Screening: Expanding the ScopeWalter E. Stamm, MDWalter E. Stamm, MDFrom University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, WA 98195.Author, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-141-7-200410050-00016 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail Genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection remains the most commonly reported infectious disease in the United States, with an estimated annual incidence of at least 3 million cases and annual related costs exceeding $2 billion (1, 2). Most initial infections in women are asymptomatic but may progress to serious sequelae, mainly pelvic inflammatory disease, ectopic pregnancy, infertility, and chronic pelvic pain. Without an effective vaccine, prevention programs have focused primarily on screening and treating young women, the highest-risk group in terms of prevalence and complications (3). Such programs have reduced the occurrence of pelvic inflammatory disease, have reduced the overall prevalence of ...References1. Sexually transmitted disease surveillance, 2001. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; September 2002. Google Scholar2. Eng TR, Butler WT, eds. The Hidden Epidemic: Confronting Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Washington, DC: National Academies Pr; 1997. Google Scholar3. Stamm WE. Chlamydia trachomatis infections of the adult.. In: Holmes KK, Sparling PF, Mårdh PA, Sparling PF, Lemon SM, Stamm WE, et al, eds. Sexually Transmitted Diseases. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1999:407-22. Google Scholar4. Peipert JF. Clinical practice. Genital chlamydial infections. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2424-30. [PMID: 14681509] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Screening for chlamydial infection: recommendations and rationale. Am J Prev Med. 2001;20:90-4. [PMID: 11306237] MedlineGoogle Scholar6. Hillis SD, Owens LM, Marchbanks PA, Amsterdam LF, Mac Kenzie WR. Recurrent chlamydial infections increase the risks of hospitalization for ectopic pregnancy and pelvic inflammatory disease. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;176:103-7. [PMID: 9024098] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar7. Burstein GR, Gaydos CA, Diener-West M, Howell MR, Zenilman JM, Quinn TC. Incident Chlamydia trachomatis infections among inner-city adolescent females. JAMA. 1998;280:521-6. [PMID: 9707141] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8. Stamm WE. Chlamydia trachomatis—the persistent pathogen: Thomas Parran Award Lecture. Sex Transm Dis. 2001;28:684-9. [PMID: 11725221] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar9. Sexually transmitted diseases treatment guidelines 2002. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2002;51:1-78. [PMID: 12184549] MedlineGoogle Scholar10. Gaydos CA, Rompalo AM. The Use of Urine and Self-obtained Vaginal Swabs for the Diagnosis of Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Curr Infect Dis Rep. 2002;4:148-157. [PMID: 11927048] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar11. Miller WC, Ford CA, Morris M, Handcock MS, Schmitz JL, Hobbs MM, et al . Prevalence of chlamydial and gonococcal infections among young adults in the United States. JAMA. 2004;291:2229-36. [PMID: 15138245] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar12. LaMontagne DS, Fine DN, Marrazzo JM. Chlamydia trachomatis infection in asymptomatic men. Am J Prev Med. 2003;24:36-42. [PMID: 12554022] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar13. Hu D, Hook EW, Goldie SJ. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in women 15 to 29 years of age: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2004;141:501-13. LinkGoogle Scholar14. van Valkengoed IG, Morré SA, van den Brule AJ, Meijer CJ, Bouter LM, Boeke AJ. Overestimation of complication rates in evaluations of Chlamydia trachomatis screening programmes—implications for cost-effectiveness analyses. Int J Epidemiol. 2004;33:416-25. [PMID: 15082651] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar15. Mangione-Smith R, McGlynn EA, Hiatt L. Screening for chlamydia in adolescents and young women. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2000;154:1108-13. [PMID: 11074851] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar16. Gaydos CA, Howell MR, Quinn TC, McKee KT, Gaydos JC. Sustained high prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infections in female army recruits. Sex Transm Dis. 2003;30:539-44. [PMID: 12838080] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar17. Turner CF, Rogers SM, Miller HG, Miller WC, Gribble JN, Chromy JR, et al . Untreated gonococcal and chlamydial infection in a probability sample of adults. JAMA. 2002;287:726-33. [PMID: 11851539] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar18. Ford CA, Viadro CI, Miller WC. Testing for chlamydial and gonorrheal infections outside of clinic settings: a summary of the literature. Sex Transm Dis. 2004;31:38-51. [PMID: 14695957] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar19. McConnell JK, Packel L, Biggs MA, Chow JM, Brindis C. Integrating Chlamydia trachomatis control services for males in female reproductive health programs. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2003;35:226-8. [PMID: 14668026] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAuthors: Walter E. Stamm, MDAffiliations: From University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, WA 98195.Grant Support: By National Institutes of Health grants (AI31448 and AI48769).Disclosures:Grants received: Abbott Laboratories, Corixa, ActivBioti; Consultancies: Abbott Laboratories, Corixa, ActivBiotics.Corresponding Author: Walter E. Stamm, MD, Division of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, University of Washington Medical Center, Box 356523, 1959 NE Pacific Street, Seattle, WA 98195; e-mail, wes@u.washington.edu. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoScreening for Chlamydia trachomatis in Women 15 to 29 Years of Age: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Delphine Hu , Edward W. Hook III , and Sue J. Goldie Relative Cost-Effectiveness of Different Tests for Chlamydia trachomatis Sue J. Goldie , Delphine Hu , and Edward W. Hook III Metrics Cited byChlamydia in adolescent/adult reproductive management trial study (CHARM): Clinical core protocolMyosalpinx Contractions Are Essential for Egg Transport Along the Oviduct and Are Disrupted in Reproductive Tract DiseasesPeriodic Presumptive Treatment for Vaginal Infections May Reduce the Incidence of Sexually Transmitted Bacterial InfectionsA Mathematical Model of Chlamydial Infection Incorporating Movement of Chlamydial ParticlesPrevalence of Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis infection in men attending STD clinics in BrazilChlamydia Prevalence Among Women and Men Entering the National Job Training Program: United States, 2003–2007Chlamydia Infection Causes Loss of Pacemaker Cells and Inhibits Oocyte Transport in the Mouse Oviduct1Estimates of Chlamydia trachomatis Infections Among Men: United StatesScreening for Chlamydial Infection: An Evidence Update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task ForceDavid S. Meyers, MD, Heather Halvorson, MD, MPH, and Sara Luckhaupt, MD, MPHThe Impact of Natural History Parameters on the Cost-Effectiveness of Chlamydia trachomatis Screening StrategiesChlamydia trachomatis: time for screening?Relative Cost-Effectiveness of Different Tests for Chlamydia trachomatisSue J. Goldie, MD, MPH, Delphine Hu, MD, MPH, and Edward W. Hook III, MD 5 October 2004Volume 141, Issue 7Page: 570-572KeywordsAdolescentsChlamydiaChlamydia infectionInfectious diseasesMedical risk factorsNucleic acidsPelvic inflammatory diseasePregnancyPrevention, policy, and public healthUrine ePublished: 5 October 2004 Issue Published: 5 October 2004 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2004 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...