Possible misdiagnosis, inappropriate empiric treatment, and opportunities for increased diagnostic testing for patients with vulvovaginal candidiasis—United States, 2018

Vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC) is a common cause of vaginitis, but the national burden is unknown, and clinical diagnosis without diagnostic testing is often inaccurate. We aimed to calculate rates and evaluate diagnosis and treatment practices of VVC and recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis (RVVC) in the United States. We used the 2018 IBM® MarketScan® Research Databases, which include health insurance claims data on outpatient visits and prescriptions for >28 million people. We used diagnosis and procedure codes to examine underlying conditions, vaginitis-related symptoms and conditions, diagnostic testing, and antibacterial and antifungal treatment among female patients with VVC. Among 12.3 million female patients in MarketScan, 149,934 (1.2%) had a diagnosis code for VVC; of those, 3.4% had RVVC. The VVC rate was highest in the South census region (14.3 per 1,000 female patients) and lowest in the West (9.9 per 1000). Over 60% of patients with VVC did not have codes for any diagnostic testing, and microscopy was the most common test type performed in 29.5%. Higher rates of diagnostic testing occurred among patients who visited an OB/GYN (53.4%) compared with a family practice or internal medicine provider (24.2%) or other healthcare provider types (31.9%); diagnostic testing rates were lowest in the South (34.0%) and highest in the Midwest (41.0%). Treatments on or in the 7 days after diagnosis included systemic fluconazole (70.0%), topical antifungal medications (19.4%), and systemic antibacterial medications (17.2%). The low frequencies of diagnostic testing for VVC and high rates of antifungal and antibacterial use suggest substantial empiric treatment, including likely overprescribing of antifungal medications and potentially unnecessary antibacterial medications. These findings support a need for improved clinical care for VVC to improve both patient outcomes and antimicrobial stewardship, particularly in the South and among non-OB/GYN providers.