白带常规检验中阴道炎五联检的价值分析
|
摘要
目的探讨白带常规检验中阴道炎五联检的价值。方法选取2015年2月～2018年2月我院妇科门诊收治的320例女性患者作为研究对象,根据检查方法将其分为分为显微镜检测法组和阴道炎五联检法组,各160例。分析两组对阴道炎的检出率、阴道清洁度。结果阴道炎五联检法组对阴道炎检测的阳性率为78.13%,显著高于显微镜检测法组的63.35%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。阴道炎五联检法组白细胞增多、乳酸杆菌、阴道滴虫的检出率分别为10.00%、38.13%、6.88%,显微镜检测法组分别为8.75%、35.63%、10.00%,两组比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。阴道炎五联检法组对细菌性阴道炎(BV)、念珠菌的检出率分别为12.50%、10.63%,显著高于显微镜检测法组的5.00%、4.38%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组的阴道清洁度检测结果比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论阴道炎五联法检测念珠菌和BV的效果较好,明显高于常规检查,有助于协助临床诊断,准确度高,值得临床进一步探讨和推广。
Objective To investigate the value of five-joint inspection for vaginitis in leucorrhea routine inspection.Methods From February 2015 to February 2018, 320 female patients admitted to our gynecological clinic were selected as study objects and they were divided into the microscopic examination method group and five-joint inspection method for vaginitis group according to the examination method, there were 160 cases in each group. The detection rate of vaginitis and vaginal cleanliness of the two groups were analyzed. Results The positive rate of vaginitis in the five-joint examination method for vaginitis group was 78.13%, which was significantly higher than that in the microscopic examination method group(63.35%), and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). The detection rate of leucocytosis, Lactobacillus and Trichomonas vaginalis was 10.00%, 38.13% and 6.88% respectively in the five-joint inspection method for vaginitis group for vaginitis, and it was 8.75%, 35.63% and 10.00% in the microscopic examination method group respectively, and there were no significant differences between the two groups(P>0.05). The detection rate of bacterial vaginitis(BV) and Candida was 12.50% and 10.63% respectively in the five-joint inspection method for vaginitis group, which was significantly higher than that in the microscopic examination method group(5.00%, 4.38%)respectively, and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the results of vaginal cleanliness between the two groups(P>0.05). Conclusion The effect of the five-joint method for vaginitis detecting Candida and BV is better than routine examination. It is helpful for clinical diagnosis and has high accuracy.It is worth further discussion and promotion in clinic.
Objective To investigate the value of five-joint inspection for vaginitis in leucorrhea routine inspection.Methods From February 2015 to February 2018, 320 female patients admitted to our gynecological clinic were selected as study objects and they were divided into the microscopic examination method group and five-joint inspection method for vaginitis group according to the examination method, there were 160 cases in each group. The detection rate of vaginitis and vaginal cleanliness of the two groups were analyzed. Results The positive rate of vaginitis in the five-joint examination method for vaginitis group was 78.13%, which was significantly higher than that in the microscopic examination method group(63.35%), and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). The detection rate of leucocytosis, Lactobacillus and Trichomonas vaginalis was 10.00%, 38.13% and 6.88% respectively in the five-joint inspection method for vaginitis group for vaginitis, and it was 8.75%, 35.63% and 10.00% in the microscopic examination method group respectively, and there were no significant differences between the two groups(P>0.05). The detection rate of bacterial vaginitis(BV) and Candida was 12.50% and 10.63% respectively in the five-joint inspection method for vaginitis group, which was significantly higher than that in the microscopic examination method group(5.00%, 4.38%)respectively, and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the results of vaginal cleanliness between the two groups(P>0.05). Conclusion The effect of the five-joint method for vaginitis detecting Candida and BV is better than routine examination. It is helpful for clinical diagnosis and has high accuracy.It is worth further discussion and promotion in clinic.
引文
[1]吴晓红.白带常规检验中阴道炎五联检的应用价值评价[J].医药卫生(全文版),2017,11(2):00275.
[2]姜昌丽,李翠娟,李雪梅,等.阴道分泌物五联检法与显微镜检测法的对比分析[J].检验医学与临床,2017,14(6):823-824.
[3]王伟娟,杨焦峰,康丽霞,等.阴道分泌物五联检临床应用[J].新乡医学院学报,2015,32(3):275-277.
[4]沈莉,卢红梅,梁芳芳.阴道炎五联检验对阴道炎病原体诊断与白带清洁度检测的应用效果分析[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2015,12(1):216-218..
[5]马勇.阴道炎五联检验法在白带清洁度、病原体诊断中的应用价值[J].中国计划生育学杂志,2017,25(6):411-414.
[6]程俊,张静.一种新型的阴道分泌物检测方法和常规镜检的比较[J].中南医学科学杂志,2015,9(6):685-687.
[7]勾朝阳,丁可,范泽旭.阴道炎感染患者不同方法检测病原体的对比分析[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2015,10(6):77-78
[8]许玉苗,吕鹏,储秋菊,等.五项酶联合检测在需氧菌性阴道炎诊断与治疗中的作用[J].中国微生态学杂志,2015,27(11):1339-1341.
[9]吴丽萍,周玉培,王学涵.阴道分泌物五联检与显微镜镜检的方法学比较[J].检验医学与临床,2015(z2):19-21.
[10]陈新宇.白带常规检测中阴道炎五联检的应用价值分析[J].中外医学研究,2016,14(21):51-53.
[11]刘贵珍.五联检检测4456例阴道分泌物病原体分析[J].蚌埠医学院学报,2013,38(8):1025-1027.
[12]陈燕明.阴道炎五联检在白带常规检测中的应用研究[J].养生保健指南,2016,7(20):348-348.
[13]陈秀兰,袁学华,赵嵩,等.阴道炎五联检试剂盒的临床应用价值研究[J].临床血液学杂志(输血与检验),2014(1):122-123.
[14]郑阳,陈良.阴道炎五联检试剂盒检测245例白带样本的结果分析[J].中国卫生检验杂志,2017,11(18):2660-2662.
[15]王海萍,龙思方.400例白带阴道炎五联检和显微镜法测结果比较分析[J].黔南民族医专学报,2015(3):161-162.
[2]姜昌丽,李翠娟,李雪梅,等.阴道分泌物五联检法与显微镜检测法的对比分析[J].检验医学与临床,2017,14(6):823-824.
[3]王伟娟,杨焦峰,康丽霞,等.阴道分泌物五联检临床应用[J].新乡医学院学报,2015,32(3):275-277.
[4]沈莉,卢红梅,梁芳芳.阴道炎五联检验对阴道炎病原体诊断与白带清洁度检测的应用效果分析[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2015,12(1):216-218..
[5]马勇.阴道炎五联检验法在白带清洁度、病原体诊断中的应用价值[J].中国计划生育学杂志,2017,25(6):411-414.
[6]程俊,张静.一种新型的阴道分泌物检测方法和常规镜检的比较[J].中南医学科学杂志,2015,9(6):685-687.
[7]勾朝阳,丁可,范泽旭.阴道炎感染患者不同方法检测病原体的对比分析[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2015,10(6):77-78
[8]许玉苗,吕鹏,储秋菊,等.五项酶联合检测在需氧菌性阴道炎诊断与治疗中的作用[J].中国微生态学杂志,2015,27(11):1339-1341.
[9]吴丽萍,周玉培,王学涵.阴道分泌物五联检与显微镜镜检的方法学比较[J].检验医学与临床,2015(z2):19-21.
[10]陈新宇.白带常规检测中阴道炎五联检的应用价值分析[J].中外医学研究,2016,14(21):51-53.
[11]刘贵珍.五联检检测4456例阴道分泌物病原体分析[J].蚌埠医学院学报,2013,38(8):1025-1027.
[12]陈燕明.阴道炎五联检在白带常规检测中的应用研究[J].养生保健指南,2016,7(20):348-348.
[13]陈秀兰,袁学华,赵嵩,等.阴道炎五联检试剂盒的临床应用价值研究[J].临床血液学杂志(输血与检验),2014(1):122-123.
[14]郑阳,陈良.阴道炎五联检试剂盒检测245例白带样本的结果分析[J].中国卫生检验杂志,2017,11(18):2660-2662.
[15]王海萍,龙思方.400例白带阴道炎五联检和显微镜法测结果比较分析[J].黔南民族医专学报,2015(3):161-162.