Cargando…

Analysis of laboratory testing results collected in an enhanced chlamydia surveillance system in Australia, 2008–2010

BACKGROUND: Chlamydial infection is the most common notifiable disease in Australia, Europe and the US. Australian notifications of chlamydia rose four-fold from 20,274 cases in 2002 to 80,846 cases in 2011; the majority of cases were among young people aged less than 29 years. Along with test posit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dimech, Wayne, Lim, Megan SC, Van Gemert, Caroline, Guy, Rebecca, Boyle, Douglas, Donovan, Basil, Hellard, Margaret
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4061452/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24920016
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-14-325
_version_ 1782321495507206144
author Dimech, Wayne
Lim, Megan SC
Van Gemert, Caroline
Guy, Rebecca
Boyle, Douglas
Donovan, Basil
Hellard, Margaret
author_facet Dimech, Wayne
Lim, Megan SC
Van Gemert, Caroline
Guy, Rebecca
Boyle, Douglas
Donovan, Basil
Hellard, Margaret
author_sort Dimech, Wayne
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Chlamydial infection is the most common notifiable disease in Australia, Europe and the US. Australian notifications of chlamydia rose four-fold from 20,274 cases in 2002 to 80,846 cases in 2011; the majority of cases were among young people aged less than 29 years. Along with test positivity rates, an understanding of the number of tests performed and the demographics of individuals being tested are key epidemiological indicators. The ACCESS Laboratory Network was established in 2008 to address this issue. METHODS: The ACCESS Laboratory Network collected chlamydia testing data from 15 laboratories around Australia over a three-year period using data extraction software. All chlamydia testing data from participating laboratories were extracted from the laboratory information system; patient identifiers converted to a unique, non-reversible code and de-identified data sent to a single database. Analysis of data by anatomical site included all specimens, but in age and sex specific analysis, only one testing episode was counted. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2010 a total of 628,295 chlamydia tests were referred to the 15 laboratories. Of the 592,626 individual episodes presenting for testing, 70% were from female and 30% from male patients. In female patients, chlamydia positivity rate was 6.4% overall; the highest rate in 14 year olds (14.3%). In male patients, the chlamydia positivity rate was 9.4% overall; the highest in 19 year olds (16.5%). The most common sample type was urine (57%). In 3.2% of testing episodes, multiple anatomical sites were sampled. Urethral swabs gave the highest positivity rate for all anatomical sites in both female (7.7%) and male patients (14%), followed by urine (7.6% and 9.4%, respectively) and eye (6.3% and 7.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The ACCESS Laboratory Network data are unique in both number and scope and are representative of chlamydia testing in both general practice and high-risk clinics. The findings from these data highlight much lower levels of testing in young people aged 20 years or less; in particular female patients aged less than 16 years, despite being the group with the highest positivity rate. Strategies are needed to increase the uptake of testing in this high-risk group.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4061452
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40614522014-06-19 Analysis of laboratory testing results collected in an enhanced chlamydia surveillance system in Australia, 2008–2010 Dimech, Wayne Lim, Megan SC Van Gemert, Caroline Guy, Rebecca Boyle, Douglas Donovan, Basil Hellard, Margaret BMC Infect Dis Research Article BACKGROUND: Chlamydial infection is the most common notifiable disease in Australia, Europe and the US. Australian notifications of chlamydia rose four-fold from 20,274 cases in 2002 to 80,846 cases in 2011; the majority of cases were among young people aged less than 29 years. Along with test positivity rates, an understanding of the number of tests performed and the demographics of individuals being tested are key epidemiological indicators. The ACCESS Laboratory Network was established in 2008 to address this issue. METHODS: The ACCESS Laboratory Network collected chlamydia testing data from 15 laboratories around Australia over a three-year period using data extraction software. All chlamydia testing data from participating laboratories were extracted from the laboratory information system; patient identifiers converted to a unique, non-reversible code and de-identified data sent to a single database. Analysis of data by anatomical site included all specimens, but in age and sex specific analysis, only one testing episode was counted. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2010 a total of 628,295 chlamydia tests were referred to the 15 laboratories. Of the 592,626 individual episodes presenting for testing, 70% were from female and 30% from male patients. In female patients, chlamydia positivity rate was 6.4% overall; the highest rate in 14 year olds (14.3%). In male patients, the chlamydia positivity rate was 9.4% overall; the highest in 19 year olds (16.5%). The most common sample type was urine (57%). In 3.2% of testing episodes, multiple anatomical sites were sampled. Urethral swabs gave the highest positivity rate for all anatomical sites in both female (7.7%) and male patients (14%), followed by urine (7.6% and 9.4%, respectively) and eye (6.3% and 7.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The ACCESS Laboratory Network data are unique in both number and scope and are representative of chlamydia testing in both general practice and high-risk clinics. The findings from these data highlight much lower levels of testing in young people aged 20 years or less; in particular female patients aged less than 16 years, despite being the group with the highest positivity rate. Strategies are needed to increase the uptake of testing in this high-risk group. BioMed Central 2014-06-12 /pmc/articles/PMC4061452/ /pubmed/24920016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-14-325 Text en Copyright © 2014 Dimech et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Dimech, Wayne
Lim, Megan SC
Van Gemert, Caroline
Guy, Rebecca
Boyle, Douglas
Donovan, Basil
Hellard, Margaret
Analysis of laboratory testing results collected in an enhanced chlamydia surveillance system in Australia, 2008–2010
title Analysis of laboratory testing results collected in an enhanced chlamydia surveillance system in Australia, 2008–2010
title_full Analysis of laboratory testing results collected in an enhanced chlamydia surveillance system in Australia, 2008–2010
title_fullStr Analysis of laboratory testing results collected in an enhanced chlamydia surveillance system in Australia, 2008–2010
title_full_unstemmed Analysis of laboratory testing results collected in an enhanced chlamydia surveillance system in Australia, 2008–2010
title_short Analysis of laboratory testing results collected in an enhanced chlamydia surveillance system in Australia, 2008–2010
title_sort analysis of laboratory testing results collected in an enhanced chlamydia surveillance system in australia, 2008–2010
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4061452/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24920016
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-14-325
work_keys_str_mv AT dimechwayne analysisoflaboratorytestingresultscollectedinanenhancedchlamydiasurveillancesysteminaustralia20082010
AT limmegansc analysisoflaboratorytestingresultscollectedinanenhancedchlamydiasurveillancesysteminaustralia20082010
AT vangemertcaroline analysisoflaboratorytestingresultscollectedinanenhancedchlamydiasurveillancesysteminaustralia20082010
AT guyrebecca analysisoflaboratorytestingresultscollectedinanenhancedchlamydiasurveillancesysteminaustralia20082010
AT boyledouglas analysisoflaboratorytestingresultscollectedinanenhancedchlamydiasurveillancesysteminaustralia20082010
AT donovanbasil analysisoflaboratorytestingresultscollectedinanenhancedchlamydiasurveillancesysteminaustralia20082010
AT hellardmargaret analysisoflaboratorytestingresultscollectedinanenhancedchlamydiasurveillancesysteminaustralia20082010