MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.08.021

Медицинская библиотека · American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2009

The effect of digital cervical examination on group B streptococcal culture.

Knudtson Eric J, Lorenz Landon B, Skaggs Valerie J, Peck Jennifer D, Goodman Jean R, Elimian Andrew A

СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate whether group B streptococcus (GBS) detection is altered by the digital cervical examination.

STUDY

DESIGN

A total of 302 women undergoing the clinical GBS culture had a digital cervical examination and a repeated GBS culture. Statistical comparison of pre-post culture results were performed with kappa and McNemar tests.

RESULTS

The clinical prevalence of GBS was 19.5%. Discordant results were seen in 30/302 (9.9%) paired cultures (kappa = 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.568-0.783). An initially negative GBS culture result was positive on repeated testing in 13/243 (5.3%) pairs. Initially positive cultures were negative on repeated testing in 17/59 (28.8%) pairs. Patients with discordant results had similar characteristics as the remainder of the study group. Given the observed proportion of discordant results (9.9%), the study had 80% power to detect a 5% difference between discordant pairs.

CONCLUSION

Paired GBS cultures showed a good level of agreement. The 28.8% rate of positive cultures becoming negative is clinically concerning and warrants further study.

Для цитирования: Knudtson Eric J, Lorenz Landon B, Skaggs Valerie J, Peck Jennifer D, Goodman Jean R, Elimian Andrew A. The effect of digital cervical examination on group B streptococcal culture.. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 2009. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.08.021.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.