B L Bailey1. 1. UAB/Selma Family Medicine Center 36701.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most clinicians treat patients for presumptive urinary tract infections based on urinalysis findings. Which of these findings is the best predictor of infection? METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study of 202 serial subjects of all ages was conducted over 8 months in a typical family medicine setting. Urinalysis and culture were performed concurrently. RESULTS: The best predictors for significant bacteriuria (defined as a culture with more than 50,000 colony-forming units) were > or = 2+ bacteriuria (sensitivity, 0.74; specificity, 0.80), or > or = 10 white blood cells per high-power field (sensitivity, 0.816; specificity, 0.651), or a positive nitrite test (sensitivity, 0.395; specificity, 0.929). The optimal combination of any two of the three predictor variables also was determined. CONCLUSIONS: Standard urinalysis results can be highly predictive of infection in typical family practice patients.
BACKGROUND: Most clinicians treat patients for presumptive urinary tract infections based on urinalysis findings. Which of these findings is the best predictor of infection? METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study of 202 serial subjects of all ages was conducted over 8 months in a typical family medicine setting. Urinalysis and culture were performed concurrently. RESULTS: The best predictors for significant bacteriuria (defined as a culture with more than 50,000 colony-forming units) were > or = 2+ bacteriuria (sensitivity, 0.74; specificity, 0.80), or > or = 10 white blood cells per high-power field (sensitivity, 0.816; specificity, 0.651), or a positive nitrite test (sensitivity, 0.395; specificity, 0.929). The optimal combination of any two of the three predictor variables also was determined. CONCLUSIONS: Standard urinalysis results can be highly predictive of infection in typical family practice patients.
Authors: Paul Little; Sheila Turner; Kate Rumsby; Rachel Jones; Greg Warner; Michael Moore; J Andrew Lowes; Helen Smith; Catherine Hawke; Geraldine Leydon; Mark Mullee Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Paul Little; Sheila Turner; Kate Rumsby; Greg Warner; Michael Moore; J Andrew Lowes; Helen Smith; Catherine Hawke; Mark Mullee Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Walter L J M Devillé; Joris C Yzermans; Nico P van Duijn; P Dick Bezemer; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Lex M Bouter Journal: BMC Urol Date: 2004-06-02 Impact factor: 2.264