CTF Summary Table: Chlamydia

Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care

Summary Table of Recommendations

Periodic health examination, 1996 update: 2. Screening for chlamydial infections

H. Dele Davies, MD, MSc, FRCPC; Elaine E.L. Wang, MD, MSc, FRCPC

MANEUVER EFFECTIVENESS LEVEL OF EVIDENCE <REF> RECOMMENDATION

Screening for chlamydial infection with the following methods: culture or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for all sites, direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) testing for genitourinary, conjunctival, rectal and nasopharyngeal sites, enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) for genitourinary or conjunctival sites, or DNA probes for genitourinary sites; and subsequent treatment with the following drugs: erythromycin or amoxicillin, for pregnant women, or tetracyclines, azithromycin or ofloxacin for nonpregnant women and for men Pregnant women
Erythromycin treatment of women with an infection leads to improved perinatal and postnatal outcomes for their infants Cohort studies163, 190 192,194 (II-2) Fair evidence to support screening of pregnant women during their first prenatal visit and subsequent treatment (B)

High-risk groups*
Available screening tests are accurate and reliable Cohort studies of DFA,76,79,100 ELISA197 and PCR112,123,198 (II-2) Fair evidence to support annual screening of high-risk groups (B)

Treatment is effective in eliminating chlamydial infection. One study190 shows that screening leads to reduction of complications Randomized controlled trials129,131,136,138,145 (I) Fair evidence to support annual screening of high-risk groups (B)

General population
Available screening tests are accurate and reliable but have poor positive predictive value and cost-effectiveness when prevalence is low. No study shows that screening and early detection lead to reduction of complications Modelling studies 13,186,195,196 Fair evidence to exclude routine screening of the general population (D)

*High-risk groups are sexually active women less than 25 years of age, women with new sexual partners, women or men with multiple sexual partners during the previous year, women who use nonbarrier contraceptive methods and women who have symptoms of chlamydial infection (cervical friability, mucopurulent cervical discharge or intermenstrual bleeding).

Link to Full Text of this review

Link to Structured Abstract of this review

Link to Selected References list of this review

Link to 1994 chapter: Screening for chlamydial infection

Top of Page

CTFPHC Home Page

Reprinted in modified format by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care
with permission.
Original Copyright© 1997 Minister of Supply and Services Canada.
For any technical issues please contact: webmaster@ctfphc.org
Last modified: November 1, 1999.

MANEUVER	EFFECTIVENESS	LEVEL OF EVIDENCE <REF>	RECOMMENDATION
Screening for chlamydial infection with the following methods: culture or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for all sites, direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) testing for genitourinary, conjunctival, rectal and nasopharyngeal sites, enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) for genitourinary or conjunctival sites, or DNA probes for genitourinary sites; and subsequent treatment with the following drugs: erythromycin or amoxicillin, for pregnant women, or tetracyclines, azithromycin or ofloxacin for nonpregnant women and for men	Pregnant women Erythromycin treatment of women with an infection leads to improved perinatal and postnatal outcomes for their infants	Cohort studies163, 190 192,194 (II-2)	Fair evidence to support screening of pregnant women during their first prenatal visit and subsequent treatment (B)
	High-risk groups* Available screening tests are accurate and reliable	Cohort studies of DFA,76,79,100 ELISA197 and PCR112,123,198 (II-2)	Fair evidence to support annual screening of high-risk groups (B)
	Treatment is effective in eliminating chlamydial infection. One study190 shows that screening leads to reduction of complications	Randomized controlled trials129,131,136,138,145 (I)	Fair evidence to support annual screening of high-risk groups (B)
	General population Available screening tests are accurate and reliable but have poor positive predictive value and cost-effectiveness when prevalence is low. No study shows that screening and early detection lead to reduction of complications	Modelling studies 13,186,195,196	Fair evidence to exclude routine screening of the general population (D)