Diagnosing Pelvic Inflammatory Disease
- 13 November 1991
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Medical Association (AMA) in JAMA
- Vol. 266 (18) , 2594-2604
- https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1991.03470180094044
Abstract
Objective. —To examine the accuracy of existing diagnostic indicators for pelvic inflammatory disease and to develop guidelines for a new diagnostic model. Data Sources. —Studies were identified for the period 1969 through 1990. A Medline search of the English-language literature was conducted using the subject termspelvic inflammatory diseaseorsalpingitisanddiagnosis. In addition, abstracts and bibliographies of articles and books were reviewed. Study Selection. —Studies were selected if pelvic inflammatory disease was diagnosed using laparoscopic findings or narrow clinical rules. Of the 15 reports identified, 12 were included in this analysis. The selected studies were grouped by a quality rating based on subject selection, definition of pelvic inflammatory disease, data analysis, and other measures. Data Extraction. —Diagnostic findings were divided into four categories: historical (symptoms), clinical examination (signs), laboratory, and combinations of the above. Sensitivity and specificity were extracted using raw data. Data were classified by quality rating. Data Synthesis. —Historical findings were usually not statistically significant predictors of pelvic inflammatory disease, and when they were they tended toward low sensitivity and high specificity, while clinical findings were somewhat more sensitive and about as specific. Several laboratory tests showed consistent value in pelvic inflammatory disease diagnosis, with high sensitivity and specificity. Combinations of indicators permitted high sensitivity or high specificity but not both simultaneously. Conclusions. —No single or combination diagnostic indicator was found to reliably predict pelvic inflammatory disease. Combining published evidence with practical clinical considerations, a diagnostic approach is proposed that emphasizes diagnostic sensitivity when clinical presentation is mild and more thorough evaluation when a woman is severely ill. Research is needed to evaluate the accuracy and acceptability of specific diagnostic models and to investigate new diagnostic indicators. (JAMA. 1991;266:2594-2604)Keywords
This publication has 16 references indexed in Scilit:
- Meta-analysis in medicine Where we are and where we want to goJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1989
- Serum CRP in the diagnosis and treatment of pelvic inflammatory diseaseArchiv für Gynäkologie, 1987
- Predicting acute pelvic inflammatory disease: A multivariate analysisAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1986
- Pelvic inflammatory disease and its sequelae in adolescentsJournal of Adolescent Health Care, 1985
- Comparison of endometrial biopsy and peritoneal fluid cytologic testing with laparoscopy in the diagnosis of acute pelvic inflammatory diseaseAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1985
- Hospitalizations for pelvic inflammatory disease. Epidemiology and trends in the United States, 1975 to 1981JAMA, 1984
- Morbidity associated with pelvic inflammatory disease.Sexually Transmitted Infections, 1982
- Epidemiology and Diagnosis of Acute Pelvic Inflammatory DiseaseObstetrics & Gynecology, 1980
- Laparoscopy for the Confirmation and Prognostic Evaluation of Pelvic Inflammatory DiseaseInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 1978
- Plasma Protein Changes Induced by Acute Inflammation of the Fallopian TubesInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 1975