Maternal, Child and Adolescent Health Program, Burnet Institute, 85 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
BMC Med. 2023 Dec 18;21(1):498. doi: 10.1186/s12916-023-03186-x.
Sample self-collection for reproductive tract infection diagnosis has been found to offer greater convenience, privacy, autonomy, and expanded access to testing in non-pregnant adults. This review aimed to determine whether sample self-collection is as accurate as provider-collection for detection of group B streptococcus colonisation in pregnancy and whether a strategy of self-collection compared to provider-collection might improve maternal and neonatal health outcomes.
We searched CINAHL Plus, Medline, EMBASE, Maternity and Infant Care Database, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in June 2022. Eligible studies compared self-collected and provider-collected samples taken from the same participants or participants randomised to either self-collection or provider-collection for reproductive tract infection testing using the same test and testing method in pregnant individuals. We included trials and observational studies. Reviewers assessed risk of bias using the QUADAS-2 checklist and independently extracted data. Sensitivity and specificity for group B streptococcus colonisation of self-collected compared to provider-collected samples were pooled using a bivariate, random-effects, meta-analytic model. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023396573).
The search identified 5909 references, of which eleven diagnostic accuracy group B streptococcus studies were included (n = 3269 participants). No studies assessed the effects of self-collection in pregnancy on health outcomes. All studies had high or unclear risk of bias. Pooled sensitivities of self-collected samples for group B streptococcus detection were 82% (95% CI: 66-91%; I = 68.85%) in four trials (n = 1226) and 91% (95% CI: 83-96%; I = 37.38%) in seven non-randomised studies (n = 2043). Pooled specificities were 99% (95% CI: 98-99%; I = 12.08%) and 97% (95% CI: 94-99%; I = 72.50%), respectively.
Self-collected samples for group B streptococcus detection in pregnancy had high specificity compared to provider-collection, but lower sensitivity, particularly for included trials. Studies investigating the effect of self-collection on health outcomes, and further higher quality trials comparing accuracy of self-collection to provider-collection, are required.
生殖道感染诊断的样本自我采集已被证明在非孕妇人群中提供了更大的便利性、隐私性、自主性,并扩大了检测的可及性。本综述旨在确定样本自我采集是否与临床医生采集一样准确,以检测孕妇的 B 组链球菌定植,以及与临床医生采集相比,自我采集策略是否可能改善母婴健康结局。
我们于 2022 年 6 月在 CINAHL Plus、Medline、EMBASE、Maternity and Infant Care Database、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库和 Cochrane 系统评价数据库中进行了检索。合格的研究将自我采集和临床医生采集的样本进行了比较,这些样本来自同一参与者或随机分配到自我采集或临床医生采集的参与者,使用相同的检测方法和检测方法对妊娠个体进行生殖道感染检测。我们纳入了试验和观察性研究。审查员使用 QUADAS-2 清单评估偏倚风险,并独立提取数据。使用双变量、随机效应、荟萃分析模型,汇总了自我采集样本与临床医生采集样本的 B 组链球菌定植的敏感性和特异性。本综述已在 PROSPERO(CRD42023396573)上注册。
检索到 5909 篇参考文献,其中包括 11 项关于 B 组链球菌诊断准确性的研究(n=3269 名参与者)。没有研究评估妊娠期间自我采集对健康结局的影响。所有研究的偏倚风险均较高或不明确。四项试验(n=1226)中自我采集样本检测 B 组链球菌的汇总敏感性为 82%(95%CI:66-91%;I=68.85%),七项非随机研究(n=2043)中汇总敏感性为 91%(95%CI:83-96%;I=37.38%)。汇总特异性分别为 99%(95%CI:98-99%;I=12.08%)和 97%(95%CI:94-99%;I=72.50%)。
与临床医生采集相比,妊娠期间 B 组链球菌检测的自我采集样本具有较高的特异性,但敏感性较低,特别是对于纳入的试验。需要研究自我采集对健康结局的影响,并开展更多高质量的比较自我采集与临床医生采集准确性的试验。