You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

P.02 - Clinical Sciences Track
P2.163 Do “In-Clinic” Molecular and Non-Molecular Rapid Tests Improve Patient Management?
Free
  1. E M Harding-Esch1,
  2. A Hegazi2,
  3. O Okolo2,
  4. M J Pond3,
  5. A V Nori2,
  6. A Nardone1,
  7. P Baraitser4,
  8. L Campbell5,
  9. P Hay2,
  10. S T Sadiq3
  1. 1Health Protection Agency, London, UK
  2. 2Courtyard Clinic, St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
  3. 3St George’s University of London, Centre for Infection & Immunity, Division of Clinical Sciences, London, UK
  4. 4Camberwell Sexual Health Centre, King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
  5. 5Academic department HIV/GUM, Guy’s, King’s and St Thomas’ School of Medicine Weston Education Centre, London, UK

Abstract

Background Excluding HIV testing, point-of-care tests (POCTs) for STIs are not routinely available in UK sexual health clinics, apart from microscopy which has limited sensitivity, is observer dependent and often only allows for imprecise syndromic treatment. From sample-to-result for routine Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) molecular tests usually takes several days. Molecular and non-molecular STI-POCTs, including automated urine flow cytometry, may improve patient pathways, obviate the need for microscopy and personalise treatment effectively.

Methods This was a clinic evaluation using a rapid molecular test for CT/NG (Cepheid GeneXpert; 90 minute turnaround) combined with non-molecular POCTs for Trichomonas vaginalis (OSOM), Bacterial vaginosis (Alere VS-Sense) and automated urinary white cell count (WCC) for urethritis (Alere UF-100). Contacts of CT/NG, males with symptoms of urethritis, and symptomatic females provided samples immediately on arrival, prior to clinical consultation. Patients also concurrently had routine culture and microscopy.

View this table:
Abstract P2.163 Table 1

ResultsOf eighteen patients providing feedback, all but one found providing samples on arrival acceptable; waiting < 2 hours was acceptable to all, but waiting > 2 hours was seen as too long. All patients waited for the results of their non-molecular POCT but only three of nineteen men waited for the rapid GeneXpert results, despite six being positive. All positive patients were given appropriate empirical treatment. A third of women waited despite all being GeneXpert negative. The TV and BV POCTs detected more cases than microscopy, and urethral smear detected more urethritis than automated WCC.

Conclusion Despite the provision of genital samples on arrival being acceptable and patients liking the idea of receiving results in the same clinical visit, only a quarter of all patients waited for their GeneXpert results. Larger studies to evaluate the clinical impact of rapid molecular testing in clinic are required before any large scale implementation is considered.

  • patient management
  • point of care test
  • Sexual health clinic

https://doi.org/10.1136/sextrans-2013-051184.0427

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.