with infection may be more stoic or familiar with the examination process, and pain will be less obvious on examination. There are other studies that also suggest that findings such as cervical, uterine, and adnexal tenderness are insensitive and nonspecific, and vary when different clinicians perform the examination. 2-5 In the "Limitations" section of the study, we acknowledged that pelvic inflammatory disease can be attributed to other organisms such as Mycoplasma genitalium, herpes, and normal flora overgrowth. However, the antibiotic regimens that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention suggests are targeted toward chlamydia, gonorrhea, and trichomonas. Visualization or palpation provided by the pelvic examination does not clarify which organism is involved or which antibiotic is needed. We agree with the concern for patients with negative test results for sexually transmitted infections and positive results for pelvic examinations, and the related risk of chronic complications because of untreated cases. In the article, we discuss a stepwise approach that begins with urine point-of-care testing for chlamydia, gonorrhea, 6 trichomonas, candida, and clue cells. For patients with negative urine testing results, we suggested the pelvic examination can be considered to aid diagnosis. Surveillance data show that rates of sexually transmitted infections and their subsequent complications are increasing every year, as is antibiotic resistance to gonorrhea. The current approach, which relies heavily on the pelvic examination, is proving unsuccessful at combating this epidemic. Empiric treatment of all patients with positive pelvic examination results, as Dr. Swartz points out, means that almost 60% of women are being treated with antibiotics that do not truly target the cause of their infection. This approach does not necessarily resolve the patient's problem and creates resistance. The use of point-of-care sexually transmitted infection results and development of additional sensitive tests for other causes of cervicitis and pelvic inflammatory disease will aid in making a correct diagnosis. New treatment guidelines are imperative, and we encourage physicians who work in high-risk areas to repeat our study for external validity and assess whether it pertains primarily to cervicitis and not pelvic inflammatory disease.