URINE SCREEN FOR BACTERIURIA IN SYMPTOMATIC PEDIATRIC OUTPATIENTS

A retrospective review of 1019 symptomatic pediatric outpatients compared urine dipstick including leukocyte esterase and nitrite to semiquantitative Gram-stained smear of uncentrifuged urine for the identification of specimens that contained greater than or equal to 10(5) organisms/ml as determined...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Pediatric infectious disease journal 1991-09, Vol.10 (9), p.651-653
Hauptverfasser: WEINBERG, ARTHUR G, GAN, VANTHAYA N
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:A retrospective review of 1019 symptomatic pediatric outpatients compared urine dipstick including leukocyte esterase and nitrite to semiquantitative Gram-stained smear of uncentrifuged urine for the identification of specimens that contained greater than or equal to 10(5) organisms/ml as determined by semiquantitative urine cultures. The Gram-stained smear was slightly more sensitive than the dipstick; 97.6% (any microorganisms seen or greater than or equal to 2 organisms/oil immersion field) vs. 90.2% (either leukocyte esterase- or nitrite-positive). The negative predictive value of both screening methods was excellent (99.9 and 99.6%, respectively). The predictive value of a positive screen was low for both methods although the predictive value of a positive screen of the Gram-stained smear did reach 63% when there were greater than or equal to 5 organisms/oil immersion field. Neither method of urine screen should substitute for a urine culture in the symptomatic outpatient. However, the urine dipstick test is a reasonable alternative to a Gram-stained smear for initial patient assessment.
ISSN:0891-3668
1532-0987
DOI:10.1097/00006454-199109000-00005