Retrospective Review of Gonococcal and Chlamydial Cases of Pelvic Inflammatory Disease in Two Canadian STI Clinics, 2004–2014
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background. Pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) commonly affects women of reproductive age. No Canadian data exists on the treatment and outcomes of gonococcal (GC) and chlamydial (CT) infections complicated by PID. Our study sought to examine cases in two Canadian Sexually Transmitted Infections (STI) Clinics. Methods. GC and CT PID cases reported by the Calgary and Edmonton STI Clinics from January 1, 2004 to September 30, 2014 were reviewed. Clinical criteria for PID diagnosis were cervical motion tenderness ± adnexal tenderness. Improved disposition was defined as no worsening of symptoms at the follow-up visit. Treatment failures were defined as those with persistent symptoms requiring additional treatment and no sexual contact between the start of treatment and follow-up visit. Descriptive analysis was completed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 19.0 (IBM, Armonk, NY). Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Alberta's Health Research Ethics Board. Results. One hundred PID cases were reviewed. The median age of cases was 20 years (IQR: 18-26). Most cases were Caucasian (n = 56) and 6 cases were pregnant. The majority of cases (n = 81) were diagnosed with CT alone, 12 cases with GC alone and 7 cases were co-infected with GC and CT. Co-infections with bacterial vaginosis (n = 32) and trichomoniasis (n = 3) also occurred. Most cases (n = 73) were treated with ceftriaxone 250 mg IM and doxycycline 100 mg bid for 14 days ± metronidazole 500 mg bid for 14 days, 17 cases were treated with ofloxacin 400 mg bid for 14 days ± metronidazole, and the remaining cases (n = 10) were treated with other drug regimens. Over one-half of (n = 58) cases returned for follow-up, of which 10 cases (17.2%) had not improved. Six of the cases that did not improve were due to re-exposure (n = 4), non-adherence (n = 1), and intolerance of medications (n = 1); one case was lost to follow up. The remaining 3 cases were treatment failures; all were treated with ofloxacin, resulting in a 30% treatment failure rate for ofloxacin treated cases who returned for follow-up (3 of 10 cases). Conclusion. The majority of PID cases were treated according to Alberta STI guidelines. All cases treated with ceftriaxone and doxycycline ± metronidazole responded to treatment while all treatment failures were treated initially with ofloxacin. Disclosures. All authors: No reported disclosures.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,008 | 0,012 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».