Accuracy of self-collection versus cervical sampling for the molecular diagnosis of and in women attending gynecological services.

OBJECTIVE

Successful measures to address the increasing prevalence of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) require practical and accessible education and detection programs.

METHODS

The ability to detect and may be hindered by a lack of adherence to proper cervical sampling. To address this, we compared the sensitivity and specificity of self-obtained samplings, such as self-collection and first-catch urine samples, to cervical samples taken by a practitioner using the nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) cobas 4800 for and in 244 women attending gynecological services in Quito, Ecuador. Regardless of sampling method, only 12 patients tested positive for (4.9% prevalence, 95% CI 2.8 to 8.4%), and no samples tested positive for .

RESULTS

The analysis revealed that self-collection was 100% sensitive (95% CI 66.4% to 100.0%) and 100% specific (95% CI 98.25%-100%), and first-catch urine was 90% sensitive (95% CI 55.5% to 99.8%), and 99% specific (95% CI 96.5% to 99.9%) compared to cervical brushing for the detection of . No symptoms were associated with a positive result, highlighting the need for testing even in asymptomatic patients. Furthermore, having a stable intimate relationship in the past year was associated with a negative result for (χ 14.01, < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the feasibility and reliability of self-collection and first-catch urine samples as alternative methods for detecting and has practical implications for improving STI detection and management programs.