Drinkard Lauren N, Huxta Rebecca A, Halbritter Ashlee, Nguyen Giang T, Malebranche David
From the Student Health Service and Camps Health, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Sex Transm Dis. 2017 May;44(5):274-277. doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000593.
Although the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention does not recommend routine oropharyngeal and anorectal screening for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in the general population, they do recommend it for men who have sex with men. However, risk-based extragenital screening of men may not have been adopted at all college health centers, and existing research has not focused on the college population.
We examined health records of men at a college health center in a large urban university over 6 years to evaluate effectiveness of C. trachomatis and N. gonorrhoeae screening. We also evaluated the proportion of C. trachomatis and N. gonorrhoeae infections that would have been missed if risk-based extragenital screening were not performed. Decisions to screen at extragenital sites were based on patient-reported risk behavior.
For 4093 male college students screened, 7.6% of the screening visits used extragenital screening in response to self-reported risk behaviors. The case positivity rate for C. trachomatis was 3.1% with urogenital-only screening and 3.7% with risk-prompted extragenital screening. The case positivity rate for N. gonorrhoeae was 0.7% with urogenital-only screening and 3.3% with risk-prompted extragenital screening. If the college health center had relied solely on urogenital screening rather than risk-based extragenital screening, 26.4% of C. trachomatis infections and 63.2% of N. gonorrhoeae infections would have been missed.
One out of four C. trachomatis infections and 2 of 3 N. gonorrhoeae infections would have been missed without extragenital screening in this analysis of college men. This study reinforces Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations for risk-based extragenital screening and is the first report to focus on college men. Because guidelines exist only for men, future studies should focus on extragenital screening in college women to build evidence for another group of patients that may benefit from this practice, given the high risk in young adults.
尽管美国疾病控制与预防中心不建议对普通人群进行常规的口咽和肛门衣原体沙眼和淋病奈瑟菌筛查,但建议对男男性行为者进行此类筛查。然而,并非所有大学健康中心都采用基于风险的男性生殖器外筛查,现有研究也未聚焦于大学生群体。
我们检查了一所大型城市大学的大学健康中心6年间男性的健康记录,以评估沙眼衣原体和淋病奈瑟菌筛查的有效性。我们还评估了如果不进行基于风险的生殖器外筛查会漏诊的沙眼衣原体和淋病奈瑟菌感染比例。生殖器外部位的筛查决策基于患者报告的风险行为。
在接受筛查的4093名男大学生中,7.6%的筛查就诊因自我报告的风险行为而采用了生殖器外筛查。仅进行泌尿生殖系统筛查时,沙眼衣原体的病例阳性率为3.1%,而基于风险提示进行生殖器外筛查时为3.7%。仅进行泌尿生殖系统筛查时,淋病奈瑟菌的病例阳性率为0.7%,而基于风险提示进行生殖器外筛查时为3.3%。如果大学健康中心仅依赖泌尿生殖系统筛查而非基于风险的生殖器外筛查,26.4%的沙眼衣原体感染和63.2%的淋病奈瑟菌感染将会漏诊。
在这项针对大学男性的分析中,如果不进行生殖器外筛查,四分之一的沙眼衣原体感染和三分之二的淋病奈瑟菌感染将会漏诊。本研究强化了美国疾病控制与预防中心关于基于风险的生殖器外筛查的建议,并且是首份聚焦于大学男性的报告。由于现有指南仅针对男性,鉴于年轻人风险较高,未来研究应聚焦于大学女性的生殖器外筛查,为另一组可能受益于这种做法的患者积累证据。