f W e sincerely thank Drs. Smith, Sorvillo, and Kuo for their thoughtful response to our paper entitled "Prevalence of Trichomonas vaginalis and coinfection with Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in the United States as determined by the Aptima Trichomonas vaginalis nucleic acid amplification assay" (1). We agree that in order to implement universal screening and/or reporting of Trichomonas vaginalis, more evidence-based outcome studies and cost/benefit analyses should be performed for those patients who are asymptomatic or are at relatively low risk for acquiring sexually transmitted infections (STIs). This is especially important, as scarce health care dollars and increased workloads tax an already-strained public health system. We acknowledge that limitations of our data collection were specifically related to the fact that patient symptomatic status and identification of patients undergoing routine Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis screening were not delineated. However, the high prevalence of T. vaginalis, a treatable sexually transmitted organism, observed in this population of women being tested for N. gonorrhoeae/C. trachomatis was impressive, and these important prevalence data merit reporting to health care providers. More research will be needed to ascertain prevalence in symptomatic and asymptomatic women, as well as men (2).Additionally, another focus of the study was to identify epidemiological data within the population currently tested for the recommended reportable STIs using a highly sensitive T. vaginalis diagnostic test. As in previous studies, T. vaginalis was detected at a higher rate than N. gonorrhoeae/C. trachomatis in most populations and incidence was uniquely higher in older populations (3). Epidemiological factors noted as significant in other population studies were similarly identified in our large geographic study (black race, age of Ͼ30 years, incarceration, residence in the southeastern region of the United States, treatment in acute-care facilities) (3). These data provide guidance for health care practitioners for focusing their testing efforts.As Smith and colleagues pointed out, most previous studies' conclusions on estimates of T. vaginalis prevalence, incidence, sequelae, and costs likely need to be adjusted due to the relatively poor performance parameters of the diagnostic tests used to draw those conclusions, including culture. Further studies are needed using superior diagnostics to clarify all these parameters and to measure the true extent of disease burden both in screening and in at-risk patient populations.We respectfully disagree that it is inappropriate to recommend that health care providers consider testing with a highly sensitive test those patients with an identified risk for STIs and treating for T. vaginalis even if that patient is asymptomatic. Our recommendation is consistent with the mounting evidence of incidence and long-term morbidity associated with T. vaginalis infection, including infertility, increased HIV acquisition,...