Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
High prevalence of rectal gonorrhoea among men reporting contact with men with gonorrhoea: Implications for epidemiological treatment.
Dutt, Krishneel; Chow, Eric P F; Huffam, Sarah; Klassen, Karen; Fairley, Christopher K; Bradshaw, Catriona S; Denham, Ian; Chen, Marcus Y.
Afiliação
  • Dutt K; Melbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. kdutt86@gmail.com.
  • Chow EP; Melbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. echow@mshc.org.au.
  • Huffam S; Central Clinical school, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. echow@mshc.org.au.
  • Klassen K; Melbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. shuffam@mshc.org.au.
  • Fairley CK; Melbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. kklassen@mshc.org.au.
  • Bradshaw CS; Faculty of Medicine, Melbourne University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. kklassen@mshc.org.au.
  • Denham I; Melbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. cfairley@mshc.org.au.
  • Chen MY; Central Clinical school, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. cfairley@mshc.org.au.
BMC Public Health ; 15: 658, 2015 Jul 14.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26170131
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

This study aimed to determine the prevalence of gonorrhoea and factors associated with rectal gonorrhoea among men reporting sexual contact with men with gonorrhoea.

METHODS:

Men who presented to Melbourne Sexual Health Centre reporting sexual contact with a male with gonorrhoea were prospectively identified between March 2011 and December 2013. These men were screened for pharyngeal and rectal gonorrhoea using culture. The prevalence of gonorrhoea among contacts was compared to that among all men who have sex with men (MSM) screened at the clinic over the same period.

RESULTS:

Among 363 contacts of gonorrhoea the prevalence of rectal gonorrhoea was 26.4% (95% CI 21.8%-31.0%) compared to 3.9% (95% CI 3.7%-4.2%) among clinic attendees (p < 0.001). The prevalence of pharyngeal gonorrhoea among contacts was 9.4% (95% CI 6.4%-12.4%) compared to 2.1% (95% CI 1.9%-2.4%) among clinic attendees (p < 0.001). Among contacts who reported not always using condoms during receptive anal sex with casual partners, rectal gonorrhoea was cultured in 42.4% compared with 12.7% among contacts reporting no receptive anal sex (p < 0.001) and 20.2% among those reporting always using condoms (p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis rectal gonorrhoea was associated with inconsistent condom use during receptive anal sex with casual partners (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 4.16; 95% CI 1.87-9.26) and a reported past history of gonorrhoea (AOR 1.77; 95% CI 1.01-3.14).

CONCLUSIONS:

The high proportion of positive cases of gonorrhoea among contacts in this study supports epidemiological treatment of MSM presenting as contacts of gonorrhoea.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Gonorreia / Preservativos / Homossexualidade Masculina Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adolescent / Adult / Humans / Male / Middle aged País como assunto: Oceania Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2015 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Gonorreia / Preservativos / Homossexualidade Masculina Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adolescent / Adult / Humans / Male / Middle aged País como assunto: Oceania Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2015 Tipo de documento: Article