Table 1

 STI prevalence rates in sentinel surveys

ReferenceDateLocationAgesNumberTPNGCTTVBVCAHDHSV-2CGLGV
Sample sizes are given in parentheses where these differ according to the STI.
TP, Treponema pallidum (syphilis); NG, Neisseria gonorrhoeae (gonorrhoea); CT, Chlamydia trachomatis (chlamydia); TV, Trichomonas vaginalis (trichomoniasis); BV, bacterial vaginosis; CA, Candida albicans (candidiasis); HD, Haemophilus ducreyi (chancroid); HSV-2, herpes simplex virus type 2; CG, Calymmatobacterium granulomatis (granuloma inguinale); LGV, lymphogranuloma venereum.
*Date of publication. †Excluding individuals who were not sexually experienced. ‡Non-treponemal, confirmed by treponemal tests. §M-PCR. ¶Positive on dark field microscopy or both RPR (rapid plasma regain) and FTA-Abs. ** Method not stated. ††Combination of M-PCR, ELISA for IgM antibodies, RPR, and treponemal tests. ‡‡Positive on dark field microscopy or FTA-Abs for IgM antibodies. §§Non-treponemal only. ¶¶LCR on urine. ***Culture. †††PCR on swabs/tampons. ‡‡‡LCR on urine and swabs. §§§DNA amplification. ¶¶¶Direct immunofluorescence. ****Direct immunofluorescence and culture. ††††EIA. ‡‡‡‡Pap smears. §§§§Culture and microscopy. ¶¶¶¶Microscopy. *****Amsel’s criteria. †††††Presence of clue cells, pH ⩾4.5, and positive amine test. ‡‡‡‡‡Nugent’s criteria. §§§§§Amine test. ¶¶¶¶¶Presence of clue cells and positive amine test. ******Culture (all Candida spp). ††††††Clinical diagnosis, confirmed by culture/microscopy. ‡‡‡‡‡‡Microscopy (all Candida spp). §§§§§§Clinical diagnosis, confirmed by culture/microscopy (all Candida spp). ¶¶¶¶¶¶ELISA. *******Western blot. †††††††Culture or antibody titre⩾1:256.
Men in the general population (household surveys)
Auvert111999Carletonville14–24†1.8%‡ (560)2.9%¶¶ (560)4.8%¶¶ (560)17.0%¶¶¶¶¶¶ (718)
Colvin121995Hlabisa9.3%‡ (86)2.4%¶¶ (85)5.6%¶¶ (90)
Williams131998Carletonville15–494436.1%‡3.0%¶¶3.6%¶¶
20006068.1%‡3.3%¶¶12.4%¶¶
Women in the general population (household surveys)
Auvert111999Carletonville14–24†4.5%‡ (622)10.9%¶¶ (622)14.6%¶¶ (622)53.3%¶¶¶¶¶¶ (771)
Colvin121995Hlabisa8.5%‡ (142)5.8%¶¶ (137)6.4%¶¶ (140)
Cronje141994*Urban Free State18–4915.6%‡ (403)29.6%‡‡‡‡ (405)
Rural Free State12.3%‡ (465)27.4%‡‡‡‡ (470)
Williams131998Carletonville15–496919.8%‡6.9%¶¶7.9%¶¶
200089318.7%‡8.6%¶¶13.8%¶¶
Men with genital ulcer disease
Chen151993–4Cape Town18032.2%§17.2%§23.9%§
Durban19914.6%§53.3%§36.2%§
Johannesburg15911.9%§21.4%§49.1%§
Dangor161986Carletonville24025.8%¶68.3%***3.3%***0.4%¶¶¶¶6.7%†††††††
Kharsany171998Durban40031%**6%**41%**4%**3%**
Lai181993–4Carletonville23210.3%§69.4%§17.2%§
199818612.4%§50.5%§36.0%§
Moodley192000Durban43816.4%††11.0%§47.9%§1.4%§8.4%§
O’Farrell201988–9Durban10042%‡‡12.0%***22%***10%***11%¶¶¶¶6%¶¶¶
Women with genital ulcer disease
Moodley192000Durban1498.7%††6.0%§49.7%§1.3%§17.4%§
O’Farrell211988–9Durban10040%‡‡11.0%***14%***18%***16%¶¶¶¶7%¶¶¶
Rajagopal221997Durban230%***18%***0%¶¶¶¶
Men attending STI clinics
Mathews231995Cape Town17014.1%‡54.7%¶¶11.8%¶¶
O’Farrell241988–9Durban174520.3%‡34.5%**4.9%¶¶¶¶
Women attending STI clinics
Altini252002Cape Town1503.3%‡11.0%†††13.7%†††10.1%***65.3%‡‡‡‡‡35.3%******
Kharsany261994Durban5129%§§31%***37%¶¶¶47%§§§§43%*****26%******0%***
Mathews231995Cape Town16122.4%‡30.4%¶¶19.9%¶¶34.8%§§§§30.4%†††††17.4%††††††
Moodley271999–2000Hlabisa69212.4%***10.5%¶¶¶29.3%***69.2%‡‡‡‡‡
O’Farrell241988–9Durban93722.9%‡10.4%**5.4%¶¶¶¶
Rajagopal221997Durban25020.8%‡18.0%***12.8%¶¶¶27.2%§§§§21.6%‡‡‡‡‡30.4%‡‡‡‡‡‡
Men with urethritis
Ballard281986*Johannesburg53.3%*** (334)17.0%*** (306)
Chen151993–4Cape Town25.0%‡ (196)39.0%******* (182)
Durban24.3%‡ (206)47.4%******* (175)
Johannesburg32.3%‡ (96)42.3%******* (196)
Crewe-Brown101991*Pretoria20177.1%***23.4%****3.5%¶¶¶¶0.5%***
Dangor291988Johannesburg21695.4%***
Hoosen301985Durban21795.9%***17.0%****
Meiring311986Port Elizabeth29080.3%***
Pillay321994*Durban22793.4%***18.5%***
Taylor-Robinson91997Roodepoort and Vereeniging18247.3%¶¶15.4%¶¶
Commercial sex workers
Ramjee331996–2000Truck stops on Johannesburg-Durban route41684%¶¶¶¶¶¶
Ramjee3414542.1%‡14.3%***16.4%¶¶¶41.3%***71.0%*****40.9%**
Steen351996–7Lesedi40733.8%§§17.3%¶¶14.3%¶¶
Williams131998Carletonville12125.0%‡15.7%¶¶9.1%¶¶
20009334.4%‡16.1%¶¶12.9%¶¶
Pregnant women attending antenatal clinics
Coetzee361990–2Cape Town19735.2%‡
Dietrich371992*Durban1707.6%‡4.1%***4.7%¶¶¶
Donders38,391988Pretoria2569.0%‡3.9%***10.2%††††25.4%‡‡‡‡
Funk401995Pretoria79812.3%¶¶¶¶24.8%§§§§§23.6%‡‡‡‡‡‡
Govender411994–5Durban16811.9%**3.0%***8.3%**20.8%¶¶¶¶52.4%‡‡‡‡‡9.5%§§§§§§
Hoosen421996*Durban3212%‡6%***41%¶¶¶19%¶¶¶¶41%*****59%‡‡‡‡‡‡
Kharsany261994Durban5227%§§6%***19%¶¶¶52%§§§§25%*****56%******0%***
Mashiane431997Pretoria300012.4%‡
Myer441998–2000Hlabisa73917.5%§§
O’Farrell451987Empangeni19311.9%‡5.7%***11.4%¶¶¶49.2%§§§§26.9%***
Opai-Tetteh461993*Durban20011%‡
Qolohle471993Durban3639.4%‡
Sturm481995Hlabisa32712%**5%**9%**44%**38%‡‡‡‡‡
19992456%**7%†††11%†††32%†††34%‡‡‡‡‡
20024492%**4%†††11%†††27%†††31%‡‡‡‡‡
Sturm491996Hlabisa3278.4%‡7.8%***12.9%¶¶¶41.4%***
Women attending family planning clinics
Fehler501998*Johannesburg8.6%‡ (210)8.6%‡‡‡ (210)18.1%‡‡‡ (210)10.6%*** (207)35.1%‡‡‡‡‡ (208)22.9%‡‡‡‡‡‡ (210)
Frohlich512002Vulindlela2212.2%‡2.2%§§§8.8%§§§23.8%§§§58.4%‡‡‡‡‡
Hoosen521997*Durban408%‡5%***15%¶¶¶20%§§§§15%*****5%§§§§§§
Hoosen531986–7Durban508%‡10%***26%¶¶¶20%¶¶¶¶
Kharsany261994Durban5522%§§5%***13%¶¶¶25%§§§§36%*****27%******0%***
Schneider541994Bushbuckridge2495%‡3%¶¶12%¶¶18%¶¶¶¶29%¶¶¶¶¶
Wilkinson551997*Hlabisa1897.9%‡4.2%***7.4%¶¶¶13.8%***15.3%‡‡‡‡‡29.6%¶¶¶¶