Literature DB >> 11149188

[Is dysuria useful for the diagnosis of infection of the urinary tract?].

R Martín Alvarez1, J Martín Fernández, C Lobón Agúndez, T Hernando López, A E Crespo Garzón, G Sabugal Rodelgo.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity of criterion and predictive value of dysuria for the diagnosis of UTI.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study to assess a symptom.
SETTING: Six general medicine clinics (four urban clinics and two rural clinics) in the 11th Health Area in Madrid. PATIENTS: The sample consists of 232 patients aged above fourteen who consulted during six consecutive months (116 of them reported having dysuria and 116 were asymptomatic).
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The diagnosis of urinary tract infections (UTI) was achieved through positive urine cultures or bacteriuria and leukocyturia in the centrifuged urine sediment. The sensitivity (S) of dysuria analysis for the diagnosis of UTI, its specificity (E), its predictive value (VP), and its probability coefficient (CP) were considered. Average age of the sample was 54 years old (range 19-82); 73% of the patients were female. No statistically significative difference of sex and age was found between cases and non-cases (p > 0.1). Dysuria showed a 96% of sensitivity (95% CI, 86-98%), a 69% of E (95% CI, 61-76%) and 3.1 of CPP (95% CI, 2.7-3.5) for UTI diagnosis. In the women subgroup there was 95% of sensitivity (95% CI, 84-99%) and 67% of E (95% CI, 58-75%). A positive predictive value of 30% (95% CI, 22-40) and a negative predictive value of 99% (95% CI, 95-100) were estimated for this symptom.
CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis of urinary tract infections is unlikely in the absence of dysuria, but to treat all dysuria patients as UTI entails a high rate of overtreatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11149188      PMCID: PMC7679603          DOI: 10.1016/s0212-6567(00)78720-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Aten Primaria        ISSN: 0212-6567            Impact factor:   1.137


  14 in total

1.  Asymptomatic infections of the urinary tract.

Authors:  E H KASS
Journal:  Trans Assoc Am Physicians       Date:  1956

2.  Evaluation of suspected urinary tract infection in ambulatory women: a cost-utility analysis of office-based strategies.

Authors:  H C Barry; M H Ebell; J Hickner
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 0.493

3.  Urinary tract infections.

Authors:  C J Schleupner
Journal:  Postgrad Med       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 3.840

4.  Diagnosis of bacteriuria in men: specimen collection and culture interpretation.

Authors:  B A Lipsky; R C Ireton; S D Fihn; R Hackett; R E Berger
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  1987-05       Impact factor: 5.226

5.  [Bacteremic urinary infection in men: comparative study with bacteremic pyelonephritis in women].

Authors:  M T Bastida Vilá; J A Martínez Martínez; P López Onrubia; L Ribera Tello; M Expósito Aguilera
Journal:  Med Clin (Barc)       Date:  1997-09-20       Impact factor: 1.725

6.  Urinary tract infections in females.

Authors:  C M Kunin
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 9.079

7.  Utility of dipstick urinalysis as a guide to management of adults with suspected infection or hematuria.

Authors:  W W Jou; R D Powers
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 0.954

8.  [Diagnostic yield of various urine tests in urinary tract infections].

Authors:  A Leaños-Miranda; I Contreras-Hernández; R Camacho; E Villagómez-Salcedo; I Cervantes-Gorayeb
Journal:  Rev Invest Clin       Date:  1996 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.451

Review 9.  Urinary tract infections in women: diagnosis and treatment.

Authors:  J R Johnson; W E Stamm
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1989-12-01       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Variations among family physicians' management strategies for lower urinary tract infection in women: a report from the Washington Family Physicians Collaborative Research Network.

Authors:  A O Berg
Journal:  J Am Board Fam Pract       Date:  1991 Sep-Oct
View more
  1 in total

1.  [Appropriate sample for the evaluation of a diagnostic test?].

Authors:  J M Santos Lozano; J A Guerra Hoyos; A Montaño Barrientos; J Ruiz-Canela Cáceres
Journal:  Aten Primaria       Date:  2001-04-30       Impact factor: 1.137

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.