Table 1

Estimates of the prevalence of T vaginalis infection and proportion with symptoms

				Prevalence		Symptoms
Study	Year	Setting	Diagnostic method	Female	Male	Male	Female
Drummond⁴⁷	1936	US, contacts of infected women	Microscopy and culture	—	—	0/4 (0%)
Peterson⁹	1938	US, O&G clinic naval hospital	Microscopy	—	24.6%	—	606/1405 (36%)
Feo¹⁰	1943	US, army recruits	Microscopy of urethral swabs	16.6% (blacks);	—	—	13/24 (54.2%)
				12.0% (whites)
Whittington¹¹	1951	UK, birth control clinic	Culture	—	5.3%	1/7 (14.3%)	—
Coutts et al.¹²	1955	Chile, men with NGU	Microscopy	68%	—	—	—
Whitington⁴⁵	1957	UK, contacts of infected women	Microscopy and culture	—	—	51/63 (80%)	—
Buxton et al.¹³	1958	US, “well workers”, O&G clinic, mental institution, women's college	Culture	—	6.3% (married workers);	—	—
					6.9% (clinic);
					15% (mental institution);
					0% (undergraduates).
Burch et al¹⁴	1959	US, vaginal cytology survey	Culture	—	60.9% (blacks)	—	—
					8.1% (whites)
Weston and Nicol⁵⁵	1963	UK, contacts of infected women	Microscopy and culture	45.1%	—	54/68 (79.4%)	—
Wisdom and Dunlop¹⁵	1965	UK, STD clinic attenders	Unspecified	5.6% (NGU patients)	31.5%	5/13 (39.5%)	337/513 (71.7%)
Ipsen and Feigl³⁹	1970	US, 38 000 “healthy workers” screened in Philadelphia	Pap smear	—	30.4% (blacks)	—	—
					10.7% (whites)
Zigas¹⁶	1977	PNG, health clinic, STD clinic attenders and male prisoners	Microscopy	10.9% (melanesian)	44.6% (melanesian);	—	—
				0% (white)	14.2% (white).
Tapsall et al.¹⁷	1979	Australia, antenatal and STD clinics	Microscopy and culture	—	0.5% (antenates);	—	—
					17.8% (STD clinics).
Wilson and Ackers¹⁸	1980	UK, STD clinic	Urine culture	14% (contacts of women with T vaginalis)	—	—	—
				0% (other clinic attenders)
Mirza et al¹⁹	1983	Nairobi, STD clinics	Microscopy	—	34%	—	—
Hardy et al²⁰	1984	US, antenatal clinic	Culture	—	34%	—	—
Mabey et al²¹	1984	The Gambia, antenatal clinic	Microscopy and culture	—	32%	—	—
Wolner-Hanssen et al²²	1989	US, STD clinic	Microscopy and culture	—	15%	—	—
O'Farrell et al²³	1989	South Africa, rural antenatal clinics	Microscopy and culture	—	49.2%	—	—
Lefevre et al²⁴	1991	France, men with urethritis	Microscopy and culture	1.8%	—	—	—
Saxena and Jenkins²⁵	1991	US, men at high risk for STDs	Urine and urethral culture and microscopy	58%	—	24/49 (49%)	—
Iyer et al²⁶	1991	India, STD clinic	Microscopy	15.8%	—	—	—
Stefanik et al²⁷	1992	Czechoslovakia, military personnel with urethritis	Culture	0.7	—	—	—
Krieger et al²⁸	1992	US, STD clinic	Urethral and urine culture	11%	—	27/50 (54%)	—
Anosike et al²⁹	1993	Nigeria, university students	Urine culture	15.6%	31%	—	—
DeHovitz et al⁶⁶	1994	US, inner city women recruited for health checks	Culture	—	28.7%	—	—
Cronje et al³⁰	1994	South Africa, random community sample	Microscopy	—	27.4% (rural);	—	—
					29.6% (urban).
Borchardt et al³¹	1995	STD clinic	Urine microscopy and culture	12%	—	—	—
Tabrizi et al³²	1996	Australia, rural and remote health clinics	PCR of tampon specimens	—	25%	—	—
Heine et al³	1997	US, STD clinic	PCR	—	46%	—	—
Klouman et al³⁴	1997	Tanzania, rural community survey	Microscopy	—	24.7%	—	—
Cotch et al⁴	1997	US, antenatal clinics	Culture	—	22.8% (black);	—	—
					6.6% (hispanic);
					6.1% (white).
Waghorn et al³⁵	1998	UK, cervical smear specimens	Microscopy	—	0.1%	—	—
El Seoud et al³⁶	1998	Egypt, STD clinic	Urine and urethral microscopy and culture	8.2% (impotence and infertility)	—	—	—
				28.8% (urethral discharge)
Sorvillo et al⁶⁷	1998	US, women attending public HIV clinic	Microscopy or Pap smear	—	6.6% (white);	—	—
					37.5% (black);
					10.5% (latino).
Passey et al³⁷	1998	PNG, community based random clusters	Microscopy	—	46%	—	—
Madico et al⁵⁰	1998	US, army STD clinic	PCR of vaginal swabs	—	9.4%	—	—