Literature DB >> 9915224

Measurement of urine relative density using refractometer and reagent strips.

R M Dorizzi1, M Caputo.   

Abstract

The relative density of urine is the ratio of its density to that of water and depends on both the number and weight of solute particles in the sample, while osmolality depends only on the number of solute particles. Water metabolism is regulated by the interaction of the renal medullary countercurrent system with the circulating levels of antidiuretic hormone and thirst. The concentration of solids in urine can be measured by weighing, hydrometry, oscillations of a capillary tube, refractometry and reagent strip. These techniques, interrelated but not identical, are commonly used in hospital laboratories and in clinical wards. We compared the results obtained in 1725 urine samples of inpatients and outpatients using an automated refractometer to those obtained using two visually read dip stick tests. The correlation coefficients (Super Aution analyser vs. Aution Sticks 10EA, Aution Sticks 10 EA vs. N-Multistix, Super Aution analyser vs. N-Multisticks were 0.663, 0.645 and 0.514, respectively) and the great dispersion of mountain plots demonstrates that different techniques are not interchangeable in the measurement of relative density. Since the results obtained after discarding the samples with pH higher than 7 and those containing glucose or protein were very similar to the ones reported above, the role of these interferents appears negligible in inducing the discrepancy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9915224     DOI: 10.1515/CCLM.1998.160

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med        ISSN: 1434-6621            Impact factor:   3.694


  4 in total

1.  Dipstick measurements of urine specific gravity are unreliable.

Authors:  A S de Buys Roessingh; A Drukker; J P Guignard
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 3.791

2.  Comparison of 3 Methods to Assess Urine Specific Gravity in Collegiate Wrestlers.

Authors:  Kristin J. Stuempfle; Daniel G. Drury
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 2.860

3.  Performance Evaluation of Three URiSCAN Devices for Routine Urinalysis.

Authors:  Kiwoong Ko; Min-Jung Kwon; Seungho Ryu; Hee-Yeon Woo; Hyosoon Park
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2015-08-24       Impact factor: 2.352

Review 4.  Progress in Automated Urinalysis.

Authors:  Matthijs Oyaert; Joris Delanghe
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 3.464

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.