• We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Logo of straninfSexually Transmitted InfectionsCurrent TOCInstructions for authors
Sex Transm Infect. Feb 2005; 81(1): 17–23.
PMCID: PMC1763744

Prevalence of urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis increases significantly with level of urbanisation and suggests targeted screening approaches: results from the first national population based study in the Netherlands

Abstract

Objectives: Chlamydia trachomatis (Chlamydia) is the most prevalent sexually transmitted bacterial infection and can cause considerable reproductive morbidity in women. Chlamydia screening programmes have been considered but policy recommendations are hampered by the lack of population based data. This paper describes the prevalence of Chlamydia in 15–29 year old women and men in rural and urban areas, as determined through systematic population based screening organised by the Municipal Public Health Services (MHS), and discusses the implications of this screening strategy for routine implementation.

Methods: Stratified national probability survey according to "area address density" (AAD). 21 000 randomly selected women and men in four regions, aged 15–29 years received a home sampling kit. Urine samples were returned by mail and tested by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Treatment was via the general practitioner, STI clinic, or MHS clinic.

Results: 41% (8383) responded by sending in urine and questionnaire. 11% (2227) returned a refusal card. Non-responders included both higher and lower risk categories. Chlamydia prevalence was significantly lower in rural areas (0.6%, 95% CI 0.1 to 1.1) compared with very highly urbanised areas (3.2%, 95% CI 2.4 to 4.0). Overall prevalence was 2.0% (95% CI 1.7 to 2.3): 2.5% (95% CI 2.0 to 3.0%) in women and 1.5% (95% CI 1.1 to 1.8) in men. Of all cases 91% were treated. Infection was associated with degree of urbanisation, ethnicity, number of sex partners, and symptoms.

Conclusion: This large, population based study found very low prevalence in rural populations, suggesting that nationwide systematic screening is not indicated in the Netherlands and that targeted approaches are a better option. Further analysis of risk profiles will contribute to determine how selective screening can be done.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (103K).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Fleming DT, Wasserheit JN. From epidemiological synergy to public health policy and practice: the contribution of other sexually transmitted diseases to sexual transmission of HIV infection. Sex Transm Infect. 1999 Feb;75(1):3–17. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Kamwendo F, Forslin L, Bodin L, Danielsson D. Programmes to reduce pelvic inflammatory disease--the Swedish experience. Lancet. 1998;351 (Suppl 3):25–28. [PubMed]
  • Egger M, Low N, Smith GD, Lindblom B, Herrmann B. Screening for chlamydial infections and the risk of ectopic pregnancy in a county in Sweden: ecological analysis. BMJ. 1998 Jun 13;316(7147):1776–1780. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Hillis SD, Nakashima A, Amsterdam L, Pfister J, Vaughn M, Addiss D, Marchbanks PA, Owens LM, Davis JP. The impact of a comprehensive chlamydia prevention program in Wisconsin. Fam Plann Perspect. 1995 May-Jun;27(3):108–111. [PubMed]
  • Scholes D, Stergachis A, Heidrich FE, Andrilla H, Holmes KK, Stamm WE. Prevention of pelvic inflammatory disease by screening for cervical chlamydial infection. N Engl J Med. 1996 May 23;334(21):1362–1366. [PubMed]
  • Ostergaard L, Andersen B, Møller JK, Olesen F. Home sampling versus conventional swab sampling for screening of Chlamydia trachomatis in women: a cluster-randomized 1-year follow-up study. Clin Infect Dis. 2000 Oct;31(4):951–957. [PubMed]
  • Honey E, Augood C, Templeton A, Russell I, Paavonen J, Mårdh P-A, Stary A, Stray-Pedersen B. Cost effectiveness of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis: a review of published studies. Sex Transm Infect. 2002 Dec;78(6):406–412. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Mårdh PA. Is Europe ready for STD screening? Genitourin Med. 1997 Apr;73(2):96–98. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Boag F, Kelly F. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis. The case for screening is made, but much detail remains to be worked out. BMJ. 1998 May 16;316(7143):1474–1474. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Johnson AM, Grun L, Haines A. Controlling genital chlamydial infection. BMJ. 1996 Nov 9;313(7066):1160–1161. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Stephenson JM. Screening for genital chlamydial infection. Br Med Bull. 1998;54(4):891–902. [PubMed]
  • Catchpole M, Robinson A, Temple A. Chlamydia screening in the United Kingdom. Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Feb;79(1):3–4. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Mehta SD, Shahmanesh M, Zenilman JM. Spending money to save money. Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Feb;79(1):4–6. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • van Valkengoed IG, Postma MJ, Morré SA, van den Brule AJ, Meijer CJ, Bouter LM, Boeke AJ. Cost effectiveness analysis of a population based screening programme for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections in women by means of home obtained urine specimens. Sex Transm Infect. 2001 Aug;77(4):276–282. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Low Nicola, Egger Matthias. What should we do about screening for genital chlamydia? Int J Epidemiol. 2002 Oct;31(5):891–893. [PubMed]
  • Wilson JS, Honey E, Templeton A, Paavonen J, Mårdh PA, Stray-Pedersen B. A systematic review of the prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis among European women. Hum Reprod Update. 2002 Jul-Aug;8(4):385–394. [PubMed]
  • Pimenta JM, Catchpole M, Rogers PA, Hopwood J, Randall S, Mallinson H, Perkins E, Jackson N, Carlisle C, Hewitt G, et al. Opportunistic screening for genital chlamydial infection. II: prevalence among healthcare attenders, outcome, and evaluation of positive cases. Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Feb;79(1):22–27. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Coenen AJJ, Berends R, Van der Meijden WI. The organization of STI control in the Netherlands - an overview. Int J STD AIDS. 2002 Apr;13(4):254–260. [PubMed]
  • Andersen Berit, Olesen Frede, Møller Jens K, Østergaard Lars. Population-based strategies for outreach screening of urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis infections: a randomized, controlled trial. J Infect Dis. 2002 Jan 15;185(2):252–258. [PubMed]
  • Schachter J. DFA, EIA, PCR, LCR and other technologies: what tests should be used for diagnosis of chlamydia infections? Immunol Invest. 1997 Jan-Feb;26(1-2):157–161. [PubMed]
  • Morré SA, Welte R, Postma MJ. Major improvements in cost effectiveness of screening women for Chlamydia trachomatis using pooled urine specimens and high performance testing. Sex Transm Infect. 2002 Feb;78(1):74–75. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Verhoeven V, Avonts D, Meheus A, Goossens H, Ieven M, Chapelle S, Lammens C, Van Royen P. Chlamydial infection: an accurate model for opportunistic screening in general practice. Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Aug;79(4):313–317. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Paukku Maarit, Kilpikari Riika, Puolakkainen Mirja, Oksanen Hanna, Apter Dan, Paavonen Jorma. Criteria for selective screening for Chlamydia trachomatis. Sex Transm Dis. 2003 Feb;30(2):120–123. [PubMed]
  • Hart GJ, Duncan B, Fenton KA. Chlamydia screening and sexual health. Sex Transm Infect. 2002 Dec;78(6):396–397. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • van den Hoek JA, Mulder-Folkerts DK, Coutinho RA, Dukers NH, Buimer M, van Doornum GJ. Opportunistische screening op genitale infecties met Chlamydia trachomatis onder de seksueel actieve bevolking in Amsterdam. I. Meer dan 90% deelname en bijna 5% prevalentie. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1999 Mar 27;143(13):668–672. [PubMed]
  • van Valkengoed IG, Boeke AJ, van den Brule AJ, Morré SA, Dekker JH, Meijer CJ, van Eijk JT. Systematische opsporing van infecties met Chlamydia trachomatis bij mannen en vrouwen zonder klachten in de huisartspraktijk met behulp van per post verstuurde urinemonsters. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1999 Mar 27;143(13):672–676. [PubMed]
  • Miller WC. Screening for chlamydial infection. A model program based on prevalence. Sex Transm Dis. 1998 Apr;25(4):201–210. [PubMed]
  • Marteau Theresa M, Kinmonth Ann Louise. Screening for cardiovascular risk: public health imperative or matter for individual informed choice? BMJ. 2002 Jul 13;325(7355):78–80. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Getz Linn, Sigurdsson Johann A, Hetlevik Irene. Is opportunistic disease prevention in the consultation ethically justifiable? BMJ. 2003 Aug 30;327(7413):498–500. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Duncan B, Hart G, Scoular A, Bigrigg A. Qualitative analysis of psychosocial impact of diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis: implications for screening. BMJ. 2001 Jan 27;322(7280):195–199. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Grimes David A, Schulz Kenneth F. Uses and abuses of screening tests. Lancet. 2002 Mar 9;359(9309):881–884. [PubMed]
  • Götz HM, van Bergen JEAM, Veldhuijzen IK, Broer J, Hoebe CJPA, Steyerberg EW, Coenen AJJ, de Groot F, Verhooren MJC, van Schaik DT, et al. A prediction rule for selective screening of Chlamydia trachomatis infection. Sex Transm Infect. 2005 Feb;81(1):24–30. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Morré SA, Meijer CJ, Munk C, Krüger-Kjaer S, Winther JF, Jørgensens HO, van Den Brule AJ. Pooling of urine specimens for detection of asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections by PCR in a low-prevalence population: cost-saving strategy for epidemiological studies and screening programs. J Clin Microbiol. 2000 Apr;38(4):1679–1680. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Morré SA, van Dijk R, Meijer CJ, van den Brule AJ, Kjaer SK, Munk C. Pooling cervical swabs for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis by PCR: sensitivity, dilution, inhibition, and cost-saving aspects. J Clin Microbiol. 2001 Jun;39(6):2375–2376. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Articles from Sexually Transmitted Infections are provided here courtesy of BMJ Group

Formats:

Related citations in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Cited by other articles in PMC

See all...

Links

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...