S. Shakthi Juwala, A.J.S.  Pravin, Azeem  Jaffer, J. Nivin Simon, 
    Clinical vs Microbiological Diagnosis of Vulvovaginitis: A Comparative Study,
    Research Journal of Medical Sciences,
    Volume 18,Issue 10,
    2024,
    Pages 604-609,
    ISSN 1815-9346,
    makrjms.2024.10.604.609,
    (https://makhillpublications.co/view-article.php?doi=makrjms.2024.10.604.609)
    Abstract: <p style="text-align:justify">Vulvovaginitis is a prevalent condition affecting women of all ages, typically characterized by symptoms such as vaginal discharge, itching and discomfort. The diagnosis of vulvovaginitis often poses a challenge due to its overlapping symptoms with other vaginal disorders. Clinical diagnosis, based on symptom history and physical examination, is commonly used, while microbiological diagnosis, involving laboratory tests to identify pathogens, is considered more accurate. This study compares the clinical and microbiological diagnoses of vulvovaginitis to evaluate the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of clinical methods. A cross‐sectional, comparative study was conducted at a tertiary care center involving 100 women aged 18‐45 with suspected vulvovaginitis. Clinical diagnosis was based on symptom history and physical examination, while microbiological diagnosis involved vaginal swabs analyzed via culture, microscopy and PCR. Sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of clinical diagnoses were calculated by comparing them with microbiological results. Risk factors for vulvovaginitis were also assessed. The study found that clinical diagnosis had high sensitivity (93.75%) and specificity (89.29%) for vulvovaginal candidiasis, while bacterial vaginosis and trichomoniasis showed moderate sensitivity and specificity. Mixed infections were observed in 15% of cases. The most common risk factors included sexual activity (60%), recent antibiotic use (40%) and poor hygiene (35%). The study emphasizes the importance of microbiological testing for accurate diagnosis of vulvovaginitis, particularly in cases with mixed infections or atypical symptoms. Clinical diagnosis remains a valuable initial step but may benefit from the incorporation of microbiological methods to enhance diagnostic accuracy and guide targeted treatment.</p>

    Keywords: Vulvovaginitis; clinical diagnosis; microbiological diagnosis; sensitivity; specificity; pathogen identification; mixed infections