Human Reproduction, Vol. 10, No. 7, pp. 1711-1714, 1995
© 1995 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology
research-article |
Infertility: When is the post-coital test normal? A critical appraisal
Department of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Reproductive Medicine, Leiden University Hospital PO Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands
Correspondence: 1To whom correspondence should be addressed
A systematic review was conducted of published studies, which related post-coital test (PCT) results to pregnancy, to evaluate the predictive power of the test and determine a definition of abnormality that yielded the best test properties. Well defined test results and valid outcome data for women attending fertility clinics were present in 11 out of 53 published reports relating to a total of 3093 women. The predictive values of normal and abnormal PCT were 0.37–0.92 and 0.58–0.85 respectively. Sensitivity was 0.10–0.90 and specificity 0.30–0.97. Likelihood ratios for normal and abnormal PCT were 0.77 and 1.85 respectively. When criteria for normality were set at a lower number of motile spermatozoa per field, sensitivity decreased with an increase in specificity and likelihood ratio for an abnormal test result. The discriminating ability of the PCT is poor, and altering definitions of normality hardly enhances its predictive power. As long as the value of the PCT for the assessment and treatment of so-called ‘cervical factor infertility’ remains unclear, a cut-off point with high specificity and a high likelihood ratio for an abnormal test result is recommended. Hence, an abnormal PCT is best defined as less than one motile spermatozoon per high power field.
Key words: cervical factor/infertility/post-coital test/pregnancy
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M.J. Keulers, C.J.C.M. Hamilton, A. Franx, J.L.H. Evers, and R.S.G.M. Bots The length of the fertile window is associated with the chance of spontaneously conceiving an ongoing pregnancy in subfertile couples Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2007; 22(6): 1652 - 1656. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. W. van der Steeg, P. Steures, M. J.C. Eijkemans, J. D. Habbema, F. van der Veen, P. M.M. Bossuyt, P. G.A. Hompes, and B. W.J. Mol Should the post-coital test (PCT) be part of the routine fertility work-up? Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2004; 19(6): 1373 - 1379. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C.M.A. Glazener and W.C.L. Ford Routine postcoital testing is unnecessary Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2001; 16(5): 1052 - 1053. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. G. Oei, F. M. Helmerhorst, and M. J.N. Keirse Routine postcoital testing is unnecessary Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2001; 16(5): 1051 - 1052. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. M.A. Glazener, W.C.L. Ford, and M. G.R. Hull The prognostic power of the post-coital test for natural conception depends on duration of infertility Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2000; 15(9): 1953 - 1957. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Tang, C. Garrett, and H.W.G. Baker Comparison of human cervical mucus and artificial sperm penetration media Hum. Reprod., November 1, 1999; 14(11): 2812 - 2817. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M G R Hull, J L H Evers, W. F. Hendry, B J Cohlen, E R te Velde, J D F Habbema, S G. Oei, F. M Helmerhorst, and M. J N C Keirse Postcoital testing BMJ, April 10, 1999; 318(7189): 1007a - 1007. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. Forti and C. Krausz Evaluation and Treatment of the Infertile Couple J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., December 1, 1998; 83(12): 4177 - 4188. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S G. Oei, F. M Helmerhorst, K. W M Bloemenkamp, F. A M Hollants, D. E M Meerpoel, and M. J N C Keirse Effectiveness of the postcoital test: randomised controlled trial BMJ, August 22, 1998; 317(7157): 502 - 505. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|