OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence of female urinary tract infection before and after urodynamic investigation and to identify the risk factors for urinary tract infection after urodynamic investigation. STUDY DESIGN: Eight hundred twenty-two consecutive incontinent women were recruited. All women were "double-screened" and treated for urinary tract infection before urodynamic investigation: first by mid stream urine culture 4 to 6 weeks before investigation and then by reagent strips for urine leukocytes and nitrites at the time of investigation. The investigation was postponed until the urinary tract infection had been treated. All women then received a standard urodynamic investigation. RESULTS: The prevalence of urinary tract infection before urodynamic investigation was 5.1% (95% CI, 3.6-6.6), and the prevalence after the investigation was 8.4% (95% CI, 6.5-10.3). Three independent risk factors were identified: age >or=70 years (odds ratio, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.14-3.48), previous continence surgery (odds ratio, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.05-3.43), and urinary tract infection before urodynamic investigation (odds ratio, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.43-6.83). The 3 most common uropathogens in the urinary tract infections after the urodynamic investigation were Escherichia coli (46.3%), Enterococcus spp (16.4%), and Enterococcus faecalis (11.9%). CONCLUSION: Despite a stringent screen-and-treat protocol before urodynamic investigation, patients still experienced urinary tract infection.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence of female urinary tract infection before and after urodynamic investigation and to identify the risk factors for urinary tract infection after urodynamic investigation. STUDY DESIGN: Eight hundred twenty-two consecutive incontinent women were recruited. All women were "double-screened" and treated for urinary tract infection before urodynamic investigation: first by mid stream urine culture 4 to 6 weeks before investigation and then by reagent strips for urine leukocytes and nitrites at the time of investigation. The investigation was postponed until the urinary tract infection had been treated. All women then received a standard urodynamic investigation. RESULTS: The prevalence of urinary tract infection before urodynamic investigation was 5.1% (95% CI, 3.6-6.6), and the prevalence after the investigation was 8.4% (95% CI, 6.5-10.3). Three independent risk factors were identified: age >or=70 years (odds ratio, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.14-3.48), previous continence surgery (odds ratio, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.05-3.43), and urinary tract infection before urodynamic investigation (odds ratio, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.43-6.83). The 3 most common uropathogens in the urinary tract infections after the urodynamic investigation were Escherichia coli (46.3%), Enterococcus spp (16.4%), and Enterococcus faecalis (11.9%). CONCLUSION: Despite a stringent screen-and-treat protocol before urodynamic investigation, patients still experienced urinary tract infection.