Acceptability and efficacy of vaginal self-sampling for genital infection and bacterial vaginosis: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND & AIM: Screening for genital infection (GI) such as bacterial vaginosis (BV) and yeast infection, for sexually transmitted infection (STI), and for asymptomatic carriage of group B streptococcus (GBS) in pregnant women are common reason for medical appointments. The diagnosis and control of GIs, STIs, and GBS are major issues, for fertility and overall well-being of affected women. Conventional testing is performed using vaginal/cervical classical sampling (VCS); this procedure requires pelvic examination performed by health care professionals which raises concerns among women. Vaginal-self-sampling (VSS), as an alternative to VCS, might capture more women. The aim was first to show non-inferiority of VSS compared with VCS to screen for GIs, STIs, and GBS; second to determine the feasibility of VSS. METHODS: VSS and VCS from 1027 women were collected by health care professionals and simultaneously carried out on each patient. GIs, STIs, and GBS were systematically screened in both paired VSS and VCS samples. Non-inferiority of VSS compared with VCS was assessed using z statistic for binomial proportions. RESULTS: Prevalence of GIs were 39.7% using VSS and 38.1% using VCS (p = 0.0016). Prevalence of STIs was 8.5% (VSS) vs 8.1% (VCS) (p = 0.0087). Prevalence of GBS was 13.4% (VSS) and 11.5% (VCS) (p = 0.0001). Most participants (84%) recommended the use of VSS. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that VSS was not inferior to VCS for the detection of GIs, STIs, and GBS. This study provides evidence that VSS can be used as a universal specimen for detection of lower genital tract infections in women. STUDY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: ID-RCB 2014-A01250-4.

Point-of-Care Versus Central Laboratory Measurements of Hemoglobin, Hematocrit, Glucose, Bicarbonate and Electrolytes: A Prospective Observational Study in Critically Ill Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Rapid detection of abnormal biological values using point-of-care (POC) testing allows clinicians to promptly initiate therapy; however, there are concerns regarding the reliability of POC measurements. We investigated the agreement between the latest generation blood gas analyzer and central laboratory measurements of electrolytes, bicarbonate, hemoglobin, hematocrit, and glucose. METHODS: 314 paired samples were collected prospectively from 51 critically ill patients. All samples were drawn simultaneously in the morning from an arterial line. BD Vacutainer tubes were analyzed in the central laboratory using Beckman Coulter analyzers (AU 5800 and DxH 800). BD Preset 3 ml heparinized-syringes were analyzed immediately in the ICU using the POC Siemens RAPIDPoint 500 blood gas system. We used CLIA proficiency testing criteria to define acceptable analytical performance and interchangeability. RESULTS: Biases, limits of agreement (±1.96 SD) and coefficients of correlation were respectively: 1.3 (-2.2 to 4.8 mmol/L, r = 0.936) for sodium; 0.2 (-0.2 to 0.6 mmol/L, r = 0.944) for potassium; -0.9 (-3.7 to 2 mmol/L, r = 0.967) for chloride; 0.8 (-1.9 to 3.4 mmol/L, r = 0.968) for bicarbonate; -11 (-30 to 9 mg/dL, r = 0.972) for glucose; -0.8 (-1.4 to -0.2 g/dL, r = 0.985) for hemoglobin; and -1.1 (-2.9 to 0.7%, r = 0.981) for hematocrit. All differences were below CLIA cut-off values, except for hemoglobin. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to central Laboratory analyzers, the POC Siemens RAPIDPoint 500 blood gas system satisfied the CLIA criteria of interchangeability for all tested parameters, except for hemoglobin. These results are warranted for our own procedures and devices. Bearing these restrictions, we recommend clinicians to initiate an appropriate therapy based on POC testing without awaiting a control measurement.