IRIS publication 723427
Self-Collected Versus Health Professional-Collected Genital Swabs to Identify The Prevalence of Group B Streptococcus: A Comparison of Patient Preference and Efficacy
RIS format for Endnote and similar
TY - JOUR - Arya, A, Cryan, B, O'Sullivan, K, Greene, RA, Higgins, JR - 2008 - July - European Journal of Obstetrics ; Gynecology and Reproductive Biology - Self-Collected Versus Health Professional-Collected Genital Swabs to Identify The Prevalence of Group B Streptococcus: A Comparison of Patient Preference and Efficacy - Validated - () - 139 - 1 - 43 - 45 - Objective: This study aims to determine the prevalence of genital tract group B streptococcus (GBS) colonization in a cohort of pregnant Irish women and to compare patient preference and efficacy of self-collected versus health professional-collected swabs.. Study design: In this prospective cohort study, 600 pregnant women attending public and private antenatal clinics at the Unified Maternity Services, Cork were included. At 35-37 weeks of pregnancy, these women self-collected an ano-vaginal swab and a health professional-collected a second swab on same clinic visit. The women filled a questionnaire to indicate their preferences. Statistical analysis was performed on SPSS Version 13.. Result: The cumulative prevalence of maternal GBS colonization was 11.7% (95% CI, 9.3-14.6). The sensitivity of the self-collected swab was 84.3% (95% CI, 73.2-91.5) and that of health professional-collected swab was 94.3% (95% CI, 85.3-98.2). While good agreement in efficacy was found between health professional and patient-collected swabs (Kappa = 0.87, p < 0.001, 97.5% measure of concordance), only 28.5% women preferred self-collection, while 43.2% preferred a health professional to collect the swab and 28.3% had no preference.. Conclusion: In our study the concordance between health professional and self-collected swab was excellent. However, pregnant women mainly prefer a health professional to collect their ano-vaginal swabs. (C) 2007 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.. - DOI 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2007.12.005 DA - 2008/07 ER -
BIBTeX format for JabRef and similar
@article{V723427, = {Arya, A and Cryan, B and O'Sullivan, K and Greene, RA and Higgins, JR }, = {2008}, = {July}, = {European Journal of Obstetrics ; Gynecology and Reproductive Biology}, = {Self-Collected Versus Health Professional-Collected Genital Swabs to Identify The Prevalence of Group B Streptococcus: A Comparison of Patient Preference and Efficacy}, = {Validated}, = {()}, = {139}, = {1}, pages = {43--45}, = {{Objective: This study aims to determine the prevalence of genital tract group B streptococcus (GBS) colonization in a cohort of pregnant Irish women and to compare patient preference and efficacy of self-collected versus health professional-collected swabs.. Study design: In this prospective cohort study, 600 pregnant women attending public and private antenatal clinics at the Unified Maternity Services, Cork were included. At 35-37 weeks of pregnancy, these women self-collected an ano-vaginal swab and a health professional-collected a second swab on same clinic visit. The women filled a questionnaire to indicate their preferences. Statistical analysis was performed on SPSS Version 13.. Result: The cumulative prevalence of maternal GBS colonization was 11.7% (95% CI, 9.3-14.6). The sensitivity of the self-collected swab was 84.3% (95% CI, 73.2-91.5) and that of health professional-collected swab was 94.3% (95% CI, 85.3-98.2). While good agreement in efficacy was found between health professional and patient-collected swabs (Kappa = 0.87, p < 0.001, 97.5% measure of concordance), only 28.5% women preferred self-collection, while 43.2% preferred a health professional to collect the swab and 28.3% had no preference.. Conclusion: In our study the concordance between health professional and self-collected swab was excellent. However, pregnant women mainly prefer a health professional to collect their ano-vaginal swabs. (C) 2007 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved..}}, = {DOI 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2007.12.005}, source = {IRIS} }
Data as stored in IRIS
AUTHORS | Arya, A, Cryan, B, O'Sullivan, K, Greene, RA, Higgins, JR | ||
YEAR | 2008 | ||
MONTH | July | ||
JOURNAL_CODE | European Journal of Obstetrics ; Gynecology and Reproductive Biology | ||
TITLE | Self-Collected Versus Health Professional-Collected Genital Swabs to Identify The Prevalence of Group B Streptococcus: A Comparison of Patient Preference and Efficacy | ||
STATUS | Validated | ||
TIMES_CITED | () | ||
SEARCH_KEYWORD | |||
VOLUME | 139 | ||
ISSUE | 1 | ||
START_PAGE | 43 | ||
END_PAGE | 45 | ||
ABSTRACT | Objective: This study aims to determine the prevalence of genital tract group B streptococcus (GBS) colonization in a cohort of pregnant Irish women and to compare patient preference and efficacy of self-collected versus health professional-collected swabs.. Study design: In this prospective cohort study, 600 pregnant women attending public and private antenatal clinics at the Unified Maternity Services, Cork were included. At 35-37 weeks of pregnancy, these women self-collected an ano-vaginal swab and a health professional-collected a second swab on same clinic visit. The women filled a questionnaire to indicate their preferences. Statistical analysis was performed on SPSS Version 13.. Result: The cumulative prevalence of maternal GBS colonization was 11.7% (95% CI, 9.3-14.6). The sensitivity of the self-collected swab was 84.3% (95% CI, 73.2-91.5) and that of health professional-collected swab was 94.3% (95% CI, 85.3-98.2). While good agreement in efficacy was found between health professional and patient-collected swabs (Kappa = 0.87, p < 0.001, 97.5% measure of concordance), only 28.5% women preferred self-collection, while 43.2% preferred a health professional to collect the swab and 28.3% had no preference.. Conclusion: In our study the concordance between health professional and self-collected swab was excellent. However, pregnant women mainly prefer a health professional to collect their ano-vaginal swabs. (C) 2007 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.. | ||
PUBLISHER_LOCATION | |||
ISBN_ISSN | |||
EDITION | |||
URL | |||
DOI_LINK | DOI 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2007.12.005 | ||
FUNDING_BODY | |||
GRANT_DETAILS |