[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-405185-105":59,"doc-detail-405185-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","diagnosis-of-trichomoniasis-comparison-of-wet-mount-with-nucleic-acid-amplification-assays","Diagnosis of trichomoniasis - Comparison of wet mount with nucleic acid amplification assays","","Trichomoniasis diagnosis is compared between wet mount microscopy and nucleic acid amplification assays, emphasizing diagnostic gaps in point-of-care testing. Wet mount relies on observing viable Trichomonas vaginalis motility within minutes, suffers from limited sensitivity and reader dependence, and may yield misinterpretations due to similar white blood cell morphology. Amplification assays show markedly higher sensitivity and improved detection across symptomatic and asymptomatic groups, supporting more reliable diagnosis to reduce adverse clinical outcomes and transmission.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":35,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/diagnosis-of-trichomoniasis-comparison-of-wet-mount-with-nucleic-acid-amplification-assays/405185/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/diagnosis-of-trichomoniasis-comparison-of-wet-mount-with-nucleic-acid-amplification-assays/405185.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Riley West","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-09-28",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":39},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"Why is wet mount microscopy considered less reliable for diagnosing trichomoniasis?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"Wet mount requires immediate interpretation to visualize motile organisms while still viable, and sensitivity is poor and reader dependent. Misinterpretation of white blood cell clusters as trichomonads can also occur.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How does nucleic acid amplification improve detection compared with wet mount?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Nucleic acid amplification assays detect Trichomonas vaginalis with far higher sensitivity, approximately doubling or more the number of infections detected. Studies cited show high overall sensitivity with little performance difference by symptom status.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What diagnostic sensitivity results are reported for wet mount versus amplification?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"The document cites wet mount sensitivity of about 50.8% overall and 38.1% in patients without symptoms, while a TMA-NAAT approach shows about 98.4% overall sensitivity. It also notes poor wet mount detection tied to viability requirements for microscopy.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},405185,1790742093,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":34,"category_name":35,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":39,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":14,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":24,"preview_page_count":4},1099523885074,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","Diagnosis of trichomoniasis: Comparison of wet mount with nucleic acid amplification assays  \nKimberle Chapin, MD  \nS U P P l e M e nt tO  \nFebruary 2013  \nthis supplement is sponsored by Hologic® | Gen-Probe  \nt  \nrichomonas vaginalis (tv) is the most prevalent treatable sexually transmitted infection (Sti) in the United States, with a prevalence recently estimated at 8.7% in women aged 18  \nto 81 from a diverse geographic distribution.1,2 Unfortunately, a trichomoniasis diagnosis usually is only considered when a patient is symptomatic, despite the fact that approximately 50% of women who test positive for infection have no symptoms.1−3 in addition, the most common diagnostic test used to identify this infection, a wet mount slide exam, is only about 50% sensitive, compared with about 98% sensitivity reported for amplification assays, includingthe newly FDA-approved amplification test, the APtiMA Trichomonas vaginalis assay (APtiMA tv assay; Hologic | Gen-Probe, San Diego, california).2−5,9 Because multiple sequelae and adverse outcomes have been associated with trichomonas infection (including increased development of pelvic inflammatory disease, posthysterectomy infections, low birth weight, and preterm birth, as well as increased transmission and acquisition of human immunodeficiency virus) and reliable treatment is available, it is critical to reassess how tv infection is diagnosed to limit adverse clinical repercussions.3  \nUNIQUE EPIDEMIOLOGY OFTRICHOMONAS  \nthe estimated number of new tv infections is 7.2 million per year in the United States.1 this estimate is likely to be low, however, since tv is not a reportable infection to public health agencies. Recent studies using amplified technology for diagnosis show the infection rates oftv to be equal to or greater than the infection rates of Stis typically screened for in the at-risk age group of 18-to 25-yearold adults, including Neisseria gonorrhoeae (nG) and Chlamydia trachomatis (ct).tv infection also appears to have a uniquely high prevalence in patients older than age 40.2,3,5,7 the reasons for this age distribution require further study.  \nDIAGNOSTIC DILEMMAS USING WET MOUNT  \nMicroscopy of wet mount slide preparation is the most common method currently used to diagnose tv infection. to perform a wet mount, a vaginal swab is collected from a patient and placed into a tube of physiologic saline. A small drop of the saline is then placedon a slide, a coverslip is placed on top of the fluid and the slide is examined by light microscopy at the clinic site by the health care provider. A positive result requires visualization of the characteristic jerky motility of the trichomonas parasitic organism. while the wet mount test has the benefit of providing a rapid result at the point of care and is inexpensive, the specimen must be reviewed within minutes to detect the characteristic motility of the organisms while they are still viable. if the saline sample is sent to a  \nDisclosure  \nDr. Chapin received research support for testing reagents and/or is a speaker for Hologic, Inc; Luminex Corporation; BD; GenMark Diagnostics Inc; Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc; and Meridian Bioscience, Inc.  \nlaboratory, it is common that analysis of the specimen will not occur within the necessary time frame and a disclaimer such as,“Results of the test may be compromised secondary to delay in transport,”will be added to the laboratory report for that test result.  \nOne advantage of the wet mount is its high specificity (false positive results are minimal); however, health care providers can misinterpret clusters of white blood cells (wBcs) as positive fortrichomonads since wBcs are similar in size and shape. thus, expertise and continued competency in reading slides correctly need to be addressed for interpreting wet mount preparations. See Table 1.  \nSENSITIVITY OF WET MOUNT COMPARED WITH AMPLIFICATION  \nthe performance of a lab-developed transcription-mediated amplification (tMA) nucleic","cbCaicHuqStcJKiv","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaicHuqStcJKiv","pdf",398420,"English","# Diagnosis of trichomoniasis\n## Unique epidemiology of Trichomonas vaginalis\n## Diagnostic dilemmas using wet mount\n## Sensitivity of wet mount compared with amplification","[{\"question\":\"Why is wet mount microscopy considered less reliable for diagnosing trichomoniasis?\",\"answer\":\"Wet mount requires immediate interpretation to visualize motile organisms while still viable, and sensitivity is poor and reader dependent. Misinterpretation of white blood cell clusters as trichomonads can also occur.\"},{\"question\":\"How does nucleic acid amplification improve detection compared with wet mount?\",\"answer\":\"Nucleic acid amplification assays detect Trichomonas vaginalis with far higher sensitivity, approximately doubling or more the number of infections detected. Studies cited show high overall sensitivity with little performance difference by symptom status.\"},{\"question\":\"What diagnostic sensitivity results are reported for wet mount versus amplification?\",\"answer\":\"The document cites wet mount sensitivity of about 50.8% overall and 38.1% in patients without symptoms, while a TMA-NAAT approach shows about 98.4% overall sensitivity. It also notes poor wet mount detection tied to viability requirements for microscopy.\"}]","Diagnosis of trichomoniasis - Comparison of wet mount with nucleic acid amplification assays | PDF",1790555070]