Sex Disparities in Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Treatment in US Adult Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Rachel Emily Solnick,Rahi Patel,Ethan Chang,Carmen Vargas-Torres,Maaz Munawar,Carlin Pendell,Judith E Smith,Ethan Cowan,Keith E Kocher,Roland C Merchant
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.20.24312317
2024-08-20
Abstract:Importance: In US emergency departments (EDs), empiric antibiotic treatment for gonorrhea (GC) and chlamydia (CT) is common due to the unavailability of immediate test results. Evidence suggests sex-based disparities in treatment practices, with females potentially receiving less empiric treatment than males. Objective: To investigate sex differences in empiric antibiotic treatment for GC and CT in EDs, comparing practices to subsequent laboratory-confirmed results. Design, Setting, and Participants: This systematic review and meta-analysis included studies from US EDs reporting GC/CT testing and empiric antibiotic treatment from January 2010 to February 2021. A total of 1,644 articles were screened, with 17 studies (n = 31,062 patients) meeting inclusion criteria. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were GC/CT test positivity, empiric antibiotic treatment rates, and discordance between treatment and test results, stratified by sex. Data were analyzed using a random-effects model. Results: Overall GC/CT positivity was 14% (95% CI, 11%-16%): 11% (95% CI, 8%-14%) in females and 25% (95% CI, 23%-26%) in males. Empiric antibiotic treatment was administered in 46% (95% CI, 38%-55%) of cases: 31% (95% CI, 24%-37%) in females and 73% (95% CI, 65%-80%) in males. Among patients without a confirmed infection, 38% (95% CI, 30%-47%) received treatment: 27% (95% CI, 20%-34%) of females and 64% (95% CI, 55%-73%) of males. Conversely, 39% (95% CI, 31%-48%) of patients with confirmed infections were not treated: 52% (95% CI, 46%-57%) of females and 15% (95% CI, 12%-17%) of males. Conclusions and Relevance: There is significant discordance between ED empiric antibiotic treatment and laboratory-confirmed results, with notable sex-based disparities. Females were 3.5 times more likely than males to miss treatment despite confirmed infection. These findings highlight the need for improved strategies to reduce sex-based disparities and enhance empiric treatment accuracy for GC/CT in ED settings.
Emergency Medicine
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The paper aims to address the issue of gender differences in the treatment of Chlamydia (CT) and Gonorrhea (GC) in Emergency Departments (ED) in the United States, and to explore the inconsistencies between these treatment practices and subsequent laboratory confirmation results. Specifically, the study uses systematic review and meta-analysis methods to compare the differences in empirical antibiotic treatment among patients of different genders. The study found: 1. **Gender Differences**: The proportion of female patients receiving empirical antibiotic treatment is significantly lower than that of male patients. 2. **Undertreatment**: Despite laboratory-confirmed infections, the proportion of female patients not receiving treatment is 3.5 times that of male patients. 3. **Overtreatment**: The proportion of females receiving empirical treatment without laboratory-confirmed infection is also lower than that of males. These findings highlight the gender differences in empirical treatment for sexually transmitted infections in emergency departments, emphasizing the need for strategies to reduce these disparities and improve treatment accuracy.