rss
Sex Transm Infect 2001;77:111-113 doi:10.1136/sti.77.2.111

The prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infection in male undergraduates: a postal survey

  1. K E Rogstad1,
  2. S M Bates1,
  3. S Partridge2,
  4. G Kudesia2,
  5. R Poll1,
  6. M A Osborne3,
  7. S Dixon4
  1. 1Department of Genito-Urinary Medicine, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK
  2. 2Public Health Laboratory Services, Northern General Hospital, Sheffield
  3. 3Student University Health Services, Claremont Place, Sheffield
  4. 4School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield
  1. Dr Sylvia Bates sylvia.bates{at}csuh.nhs.uk
  • Accepted 2 February 2001

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infection in male undergraduates and to investigate whether prevalence increases with time spent at university. To investigate the feasibility of screening men for C trachomatis by self sampling and posting of urine specimens.

Methods: The study design was a postal survey undertaken by the Department of Genito-Urinary Medicine (GUM) and Student University Health Service (SUHS) in Sheffield. 2607 male undergraduates from the SUHS patient list were invited to participate in the study by providing a first void urine specimen and posting it to the laboratory. The main outcome measure was the detection of C trachomatis infection.

Results: 758 students participated in the study, a response rate of 29.1%. Nine students (1.2%) tested positive for C trachomatis. The prevalence of infection in the first, second, and third year of study was 0.7%, 1.5%, and 1.6% of participants respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in prevalence of infection between first and third year students (χ2 test, p = 0.32). However, students with chlamydia had a higher median age (Mann-Whitney U test, p=<0.05). Contact tracing identified four further cases of C trachomatis infection.

Conclusion: Screening for C trachomatis infection by postal survey is feasible. However, the response rate in this study was poor and the estimated sample size was not reached. Therefore, it has not been possible to determine the true prevalence of infection in this population or to accurately assess changes in prevalence with time spent at university.

Footnotes

    This Article

    1. Abstract
    2. Full text
    3. PDF

    Responses

    1. Submit a response
    2. No responses published

    Register for free content

    The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

    Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.