Premium
Laboratory diagnostics for non‐viral sexually transmitted infections in St. Petersburg, Russia: current situation and hallmarks for improvements
Author(s) -
Domeika M,
Litvinenko I,
Smirnova T,
Gaivaronskaya O,
Savicheva A,
Sokolovskiy E,
Ballard RC,
Unemo M
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
journal of the european academy of dermatology and venereology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.655
H-Index - 107
eISSN - 1468-3083
pISSN - 0926-9959
DOI - 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2008.02739.x
Subject(s) - medicine , chlamydia trachomatis , syphilis , trichomonas vaginalis , neisseria gonorrhoeae , trichomoniasis , gonorrhea , sexually transmitted disease , chlamydia , serology , st petersburg , gynecology , virology , immunology , antibody , microbiology and biotechnology , human immunodeficiency virus (hiv) , pathology , metropolitan area , biology
Background The numbers and performance characteristics of laboratories providing sexually transmitted infection (STI) diagnostic services, as well as the rates of morbidity due to STIs in St. Petersburg, Russia, remain largely unknown. Objective The aim of the present study was to evaluate the range, quality and availability of diagnostic services for several non‐viral STIs ( Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Treponema pallidum and Trichomonas vaginalis ) in St. Petersburg during the period September 2005 to June 2006. Methods Survey data focusing on organization and performance characteristics of STI diagnostic services were assessed using questionnaires, telephone interviews and site visits. Results A total of 118 laboratories providing STI diagnostic services were identified. Of the surveyed laboratories, 54% (64 of 118) diagnosed syphilis, 81% (96 of 118) gonorrhoea, 80% (94 of 118) trichomoniasis and 49% (58 of 118) chlamydial infections. Although most of the laboratories could provide a presumptive diagnosis for syphilis, most of the N. gonorrhoeae and T. vaginalis testing of women did not adhere to international recommendations. Of the laboratories with the capacity to diagnose C. trachomatis infection, 69% still used serological testing (enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay) to detect antibodies to C. trachomatis . Conclusions Overall, the diagnostic methods used to establish a laboratory diagnosis, the system of case reporting, the training of laboratory personnel and the level of interlaboratory communication clearly require improvement. This study represents the first step in a process of evaluation of the laboratory support for STI services and the establishment of an interlaboratory network in St. Petersburg.