Literature DB >> 28178863

Patient safety is not compromised by excluding microscopic examination of negative urine dipstick.

Marijana Miler1, Nora Nikolac1.   

Abstract

Background Microscopic examination of samples with negative dipstick results is not necessary. The aims of this study were to: (i) assess the risk of excluding urine sediment examination with negative dipstick results and (ii) calculate time savings by introducing this process. Methods The risk analysis was done for samples with negative urine dipstick and positive sediment findings. Possible missed elements in sediment were defined as 21 errors. Time saving was calculated as average time for preparation and examination sediments. Data were presented as counts and percentages. Results Out of 2997 samples, negative dipstick results were reported for 926 (30.6%) samples, out of which, microscopic examinations were positive for 527 (17.6%) samples. 18/21 errors were detected, with missing <5 squamous epithelial cells (SQEC) and bacteria 1+ as the most frequent ones (22.7% and 22.4%, respectively). Errors with the intermediate risk for patients were missing to report: ≥5 SQEC, ≥5 transitional epithelial cells, ≥10 hyaline casts (11.9%, 0.21%, 0.32%, respectively). Errors associated with high risk were not detected. Estimated total time saving is more than 25 h/month. Conclusions Microscopic examination of urine samples with negative dipstick results can be excluded without risk for patients and can result with considerable time savings.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Laboratory optimization; patient safety; risk analysis; urinalysis

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28178863     DOI: 10.1177/0004563216687589

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Clin Biochem        ISSN: 0004-5632            Impact factor:   2.057


  4 in total

1.  Key Performance Indicators to Measure Improvement After Implementation of Total Laboratory Automation Abbott Accelerator a3600.

Authors:  Marijana Miler; Nora Nikolac Gabaj; Lora Dukic; Ana-Maria Simundic
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2017-12-27       Impact factor: 4.460

2.  Discrepancy in results between dipstick urinalysis and urine sediment microscopy.

Authors:  Anca Bacârea; Gyula László Fekete; Bianca Liana Grigorescu; Vladimir Constantin Bacârea
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2021-03-23       Impact factor: 2.447

3.  Ascorbic acid-A black hole of urine chemistry screening.

Authors:  Adriana Unic; Nora Nikolac Gabaj; Marijana Miler; Jelena Culej; Adrijana Lisac; Anita Horvat; Nada Vrkic
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2018-02-25       Impact factor: 2.352

4.  Preanalytics of urine sediment examination: effect of relative centrifugal force, tube type, volume of sample and supernatant removal.

Authors:  Amalija Bunjevac; Nora Nikolac Gabaj; Marijana Miler; Anita Horvat
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2018-01-10       Impact factor: 2.313

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.