These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Clinical examination and laboratory tests for estimation of trachoma prevalence in a remote setting: what are they really telling us?
    Author: Wright HR, Taylor HR.
    Journal: Lancet Infect Dis; 2005 May; 5(5):313-20. PubMed ID: 15854887.
    Abstract:
    Worldwide, an estimated 84 million people have active trachoma and 7.6 million people have trachomatous trichiasis. WHO's SAFE strategy is an effective tool in the worldwide effort to eliminate blinding trachoma, but its institution and monitoring requires a simple, reliable, and cost-effective method to detect disease. To date, clinical examination has provided the main method of diagnosis. Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis with nucleic acid amplification tests does not always correlate well with clinical findings, which has prompted the suggestion that these methods should replace clinical examination. However, a review of the research carried out in animals and human beings suggests the relation between laboratory tests and clinical examination is due to the kinetics of trachoma and not to an inherent problem in either detection system. Given the increased difficulties of using laboratory tests in parts of the world where trachoma is endemic, we should not abandon clinical grading as a tool to assess the need for, and the effectiveness of, trachoma intervention programmes.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]