Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Langsford, M. J
Right arrow Articles by Dance, D. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Langsford, M. J
Right arrow Articles by Dance, D. A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Family Practice Vol. 18, No. 3, 253-257
© Oxford University Press 2001


Infectious Diseases

The effect of introduction of a guideline on the management of vaginal discharge and in particular bacterial vaginosis in primary care

Marian J Langsford, Frank F Dobbsa,, George M Morrisonb, and David AB Dance,b

Highlands Health Centre, Fore Street, Ivybridge, Plymouth PL21 0AD, UK,
a Department of Primary Health Care and General Practice, the ITTC Building, Doniford, Plymouth PL6 8BX,
b Genitourinary Medicine Department and
cPlymouth Public Health Laboratory, Doniford Hospital, Plymouth PL6 8DH, UK.

Background. Bacterial vaginosis (BV) is the commonest cause of vaginal discharge, and its association with obstetric and gynaecological complications is being recognized increasingly. It was our impression that BV was poorly understood and underdiagnosed in family practice.

Objective. The aim of this study was to explore the management of patients with vaginal symptoms by family practitioners and to see if the management changed after the assimilation of best practice guidelines.

Method. Family practitioners were invited to complete a baseline questionnaire of their perceived practice, and to record actual practice when consulted about vaginal symptoms, for a minimum of 4 weeks. Consensus best practice guidelines were then provided and practice recorded for a similar period.

Results. Baseline data was received from 34 practitioners and suggested that the symptoms and signs of different vaginal infections were not well known. Most symptomatic patients were only investigated at re-presentation with unresolved symptoms or at recurrence, and 43% of respondents treated with empirical antifungals as a first line approach. Pregnant patients were only occasionally asked about symptoms and only occasionally examined if symptomatic. Pre-guideline practice data from 30 practitioners showed 1.2 patient consultations/week, of which 60% were examined and 55% had a high vaginal swab (HVS) sent. Only 2% had near-patient tests done. Post-guideline data from 23 family practitioners showed a lower recorded consultation rate at 0.7/week, but 90% of these were examined, 77% had an HVS sent and 69% had near-patient tests done. Of the 36 HVS examined by Gram stain, 19 (53%) showed Lactobacillus predominant flora and 10 (28%) suggested BV. Seven (19%) were borderline or ungradable. Only three (8%) showed yeasts, one of which also showed BV.

Conclusions. Baseline data supported our impression that BV was under-recognized. Guidelines appeared to improve the rate of investigation of women consulting with vaginal symptoms.

Keywords. Bacterial vaginosis, family practice, guideline, management.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Clin. Microbiol.Home page
I. Hilmarsdottir, G. S. Hauksdottir, J. D. Johannesdottir, T. Danielsdottir, H. Thorsteinsdottir, and J. H. Olafsson
Evaluation of a rapid gram stain interpretation method for diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis.
J. Clin. Microbiol., March 1, 2006; 44(3): 1139 - 1140.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.