Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Archives
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Archives
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM on Bluesky
  • JABFM On Facebook
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube
Research ArticleOriginal Research

Are a Speculum Examination and Wet Mount Always Necessary for Patients With Vaginal Symptoms? A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Matthew Anderson, Andreas Cohrssen, Kathleen Klink and Danit Brahver
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine November 2009, 22 (6) 617-624; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2009.06.090006
Matthew Anderson
MD, MSc
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Andreas Cohrssen
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kathleen Klink
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Danit Brahver
BS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 1.

    Flow chart of participant enrollment, randomization, follow-up and analysis (based on the CONSORT Flow Diagram: http://www.consort-statement.org/consort-statement/flow-diagram/).

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Management Algorithm and Treatments for Vaginal Symptoms

    Control GroupIntervention GroupTreatments
    Patient meets 3 or 4 Amsel criteria and is diagnosed with bacterial vaginosisPatients whose chief complaint is odor are diagnosed with presumptive bacterial vaginosisMetronidazole 500 mg bid for 7 days Alternative: Clindamycin 2% cream intravaginal bid for 7 days or Metrogel intravaginal qhs for 5 days
    Yeast forms are seen and patient is diagnosed with candidiasisPatients whose chief complaint is itching or irritation are diagnosed with presumptive candidiasisFluconazole 150 mg po once at the time of visit Alternative: Terconazole vaginal cream or suppositories
    Trichomonads are seen on microscopy or Trichomonas vaginalis culture is positivePatients treated if culture is positiveMetronidazole 2 g po at the time of visit; partner referred for treatment Alternative: Metronidazole 500 mg po bid for 5 days
    If none of the above, provider may either treat as per the intervention arm or not treatAll other patients are treated for both presumptive candidiasis and presumptive bacterial vaginosis
    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Characteristics of the Study Population of Forty-six Women with Vaginal Symptoms

    All Women (n = 46)Intervention Group (n = 24)Control Group (n = 22)
    Age (years) (mean [SD])32 (7.6)31.6 (7.7)32.5 (7.7)
        Range21–48(21–47)(22–48)
    Nulliparous (n [%])7 (15)4 (17)3 (14)
    Gravity (mean [SD])3.3 (2.6)3.3 (2.0)3.4 (3.2)
        Range1–151–71–15
    Sexually active (n [%])39 (85)19 (80)20 (91)
    History of STD18 (39)8 (33)10 (45)
    Current contraceptive use* (n [%])5 (11)1 (4)4 (18)
    Current antibiotic usage (n [%])3 (7)0 (0)3 (14)
    Study site (n)
        FHC402020
        Phillips642
    Chief complaint
        Itching (n [%])16 (35)9 (38)7 (32)
        Odor (n [%])16 (35)8 (33)8 (37)
        Discharge(n [%])9 (20)3 (13)6 (27)
        Irritation (n [%])3 (7)2 (8)1 (5)
        Other (n [%])2 (4)2 (8)0 (0)
    Self therapy† (n [%])14 (30)7 (29)7 (32)
        Clotrimazole10
        Douche20
        Tioconazole34
        Vagisil33
        Zinc oxide01
        Wipees10
        Homeopathy01
    • * The woman in the intervention group used oral contraceptive pills. Two women in the control group used oral contraceptive pills and 2 used Depo-Provera.

    • † Some women took more than one therapy. Specific types of self-therapy shown as n.

    • STD, sexually transmitted disease; FHC, family health center.

    • View popup
    Table 3.

    Initial Management of Forty-six Women with Vaginal Symptoms

    Intervention Group (n = 24)Control Group (n = 22)
    Bacterial vaginosis
        Empiric91
        Confirmed09
    Candidal vaginitis
        Empiric143
        Confirmed08
    Both bacterial vaginosis and candida10
    No treatment given01
    • View popup
    Table 4.

    Relationship Between Symptom Resolution, Diagnosis, and Clinical Management*

    No BetterSomewhat BetterCompletely Better
    All women31328
    Control group
        No diagnosis100
        Confirmed Candida224
        Confirmed bacterial vaginosis026
        Empiric Candida030
        Empiric bacterial vaginosis010
    Intervention group†
        Empiric bacterial vaginosis027
        Empiric Candida0310
        Both empiric bacterial vaginosis and empiric Candida001
    Women with STD
        Trichomonas010
        GC and Chlamydia001
    • All data provided as n.

    • * Two women were lost to follow-up. One of these had trichomonas.

    • † Women in the ntervention group showed superior resolution of symptoms (P = .046; Fischer's exact test).

    • STD, sexually transmitted disease; GC, Gonorrhea.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine: 22 (6)
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
Vol. 22, Issue 6
November-December 2009
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Board of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Are a Speculum Examination and Wet Mount Always Necessary for Patients With Vaginal Symptoms? A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Board of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Board of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
3 + 15 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Are a Speculum Examination and Wet Mount Always Necessary for Patients With Vaginal Symptoms? A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Matthew Anderson, Andreas Cohrssen, Kathleen Klink, Danit Brahver
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Nov 2009, 22 (6) 617-624; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2009.06.090006

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Are a Speculum Examination and Wet Mount Always Necessary for Patients With Vaginal Symptoms? A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Matthew Anderson, Andreas Cohrssen, Kathleen Klink, Danit Brahver
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Nov 2009, 22 (6) 617-624; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2009.06.090006
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Guest Family Physician Commentaries
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • A Typical Day in the Family Medicine Office
  • Guest Family Physician Commentaries
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Successful Implementation of Integrated Behavioral Health
  • Identifying and Addressing Social Determinants of Health with an Electronic Health Record
  • Integrating Adverse Childhood Experiences and Social Risks Screening in Adult Primary Care
Show more Original Research

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2025 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire