Literature DB >> 34086154

Improving Compliance with 24-H Urine Collections: Understanding Inadequacies in the Collection Process and Risk Factors for Poor Compliance.

Alice Xiang1, Alex Nourian1, Eric Ghiraldi1, Justin I Friedlander2,3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review paper is to describe the 24-h urine collection in terms of its utility, collection process, and common problems with its acquisition. RECENT
FINDINGS: Although 24-h urine collections are standard of care for high-risk stone formers, several nuances in test acquisition including inaccurate urine collections 50% of the time and poor patient compliance limit its potential utility. Compliance in obtaining 24-h urine collections has been shown to be improved in patients who have not undergone surgical treatment of urinary calculi, patients with metabolic stone disease or family history of stone disease, Caucasian ethnicity, and in those with more sedentary occupations. Studies show conflicting data of compliance regarding patient age and gender. Physicians must understand the difficulties regarding 24-h urine collections including patient compliance, variability between collections, and complexities with interpretation to best utilize this tool in guiding clinical management for the treatment of nephrolithiasis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  24-h urine; Nephrolithiasis; Poor compliance; Urine analysis; Urine collection process

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34086154     DOI: 10.1007/s11934-021-01057-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Urol Rep        ISSN: 1527-2737            Impact factor:   3.092


  14 in total

Review 1.  The role of the 24-h urine collection in the management of nephrolithiasis.

Authors:  Jennifer L Ennis; John R Asplin
Journal:  Int J Surg       Date:  2016-11-11       Impact factor: 6.071

Review 2.  The Role of the 24-Hour Urine Collection in the Prevention of Kidney Stone Recurrence.

Authors:  Ryan S Hsi; Thomas Sanford; David S Goldfarb; Marshall L Stoller
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Prevalence of 24-hour urine collection in high risk stone formers.

Authors:  Jaclyn C Milose; Samuel R Kaufman; Brent K Hollenbeck; J Stuart Wolf; John M Hollingsworth
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-09-07       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Medical management of kidney stones: AUA guideline.

Authors:  Margaret S Pearle; David S Goldfarb; Dean G Assimos; Gary Curhan; Cynthia J Denu-Ciocca; Brian R Matlaga; Manoj Monga; Kristina L Penniston; Glenn M Preminger; Thomas M T Turk; James R White
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Predicting Patients with Inadequate 24- or 48-Hour Urine Collections at Time of Metabolic Stone Evaluation.

Authors:  Barry B McGuire; Yasin Bhanji; Vidit Sharma; Brendan T Frainey; Megan McClean; Caroline Dong; Kalen Rimar; Kent T Perry; Robert B Nadler
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2015-01-07       Impact factor: 2.942

6.  A prospective study of nonmedical prophylaxis after a first kidney stone.

Authors:  R Kocvara; P Plasgura; A Petrík; G Louzenský; K Bartonícková; J Dvorácek
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 5.588

7.  Adequate or not? A comparison of 24-hour urine studies for renal stone prevention by creatinine to weight ratio.

Authors:  Mark D Sawyer; Mary S Dietrich; Ryan B Pickens; S Duke Herrell; Nicole L Miller
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2012-11-07       Impact factor: 2.942

8.  Contemporary Attitudes and Practice Patterns of North American Urologists in Investigating Stone-Forming Patients-A Survey of Endourological Society Members.

Authors:  Barry B McGuire; Richard S Matulewicz; Rian Zuccarino-Crowe; Robert B Nadler; Kent T Perry
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2016-03-31       Impact factor: 2.942

9.  How Much Information is Lost When You Only Collect One 24-Hour Urine Sample during the Initial Metabolic Evaluation?

Authors:  Abdulrahman F Alruwaily; Casey A Dauw; Maggie J Bierlein; Phyllis Yan; John R Asplin; Khurshid R Ghani; J Stuart Wolf; John M Hollingsworth
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Provider variation in the quality of metabolic stone management.

Authors:  Casey A Dauw; Abdulrahman F Alruwaily; Maggie J Bierlein; John R Asplin; Khurshid R Ghani; J Stuart Wolf; John M Hollingsworth
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2014-10-05       Impact factor: 7.450

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.