Cargando…
Urine sampling techniques in symptomatic primary-care patients: a diagnostic accuracy review
BACKGROUND: Choice of urine sampling technique in urinary tract infection may impact diagnostic accuracy and thus lead to possible over- or undertreatment. Currently no evidencebased consensus exists regarding correct sampling technique of urine from women with symptoms of urinary tract infection in...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4898352/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27278078 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-016-0465-4 |
_version_ | 1782436338484641792 |
---|---|
author | Holm, Anne Aabenhus, Rune |
author_facet | Holm, Anne Aabenhus, Rune |
author_sort | Holm, Anne |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Choice of urine sampling technique in urinary tract infection may impact diagnostic accuracy and thus lead to possible over- or undertreatment. Currently no evidencebased consensus exists regarding correct sampling technique of urine from women with symptoms of urinary tract infection in primary care. The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of urine culture from different sampling-techniques in symptomatic non-pregnant women in primary care. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted by searching Medline and Embase for clinical studies conducted in primary care using a randomized or paired design to compare the result of urine culture obtained with two or more collection techniques in adult, female, non-pregnant patients with symptoms of urinary tract infection. We evaluated quality of the studies and compared accuracy based on dichotomized outcomes. RESULTS: We included seven studies investigating urine sampling technique in 1062 symptomatic patients in primary care. Mid-stream-clean-catch had a positive predictive value of 0.79 to 0.95 and a negative predictive value close to 1 compared to sterile techniques. Two randomized controlled trials found no difference in infection rate between mid-stream-clean-catch, mid-stream-urine and random samples. CONCLUSIONS: At present, no evidence suggests that sampling technique affects the accuracy of the microbiological diagnosis in non-pregnant women with symptoms of urinary tract infection in primary care. However, the evidence presented is in-direct and the difference between mid-stream-clean-catch, mid-stream-urine and random samples remains to be investigated in a paired design to verify the present findings. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-016-0465-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4898352 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-48983522016-06-09 Urine sampling techniques in symptomatic primary-care patients: a diagnostic accuracy review Holm, Anne Aabenhus, Rune BMC Fam Pract Research Article BACKGROUND: Choice of urine sampling technique in urinary tract infection may impact diagnostic accuracy and thus lead to possible over- or undertreatment. Currently no evidencebased consensus exists regarding correct sampling technique of urine from women with symptoms of urinary tract infection in primary care. The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of urine culture from different sampling-techniques in symptomatic non-pregnant women in primary care. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted by searching Medline and Embase for clinical studies conducted in primary care using a randomized or paired design to compare the result of urine culture obtained with two or more collection techniques in adult, female, non-pregnant patients with symptoms of urinary tract infection. We evaluated quality of the studies and compared accuracy based on dichotomized outcomes. RESULTS: We included seven studies investigating urine sampling technique in 1062 symptomatic patients in primary care. Mid-stream-clean-catch had a positive predictive value of 0.79 to 0.95 and a negative predictive value close to 1 compared to sterile techniques. Two randomized controlled trials found no difference in infection rate between mid-stream-clean-catch, mid-stream-urine and random samples. CONCLUSIONS: At present, no evidence suggests that sampling technique affects the accuracy of the microbiological diagnosis in non-pregnant women with symptoms of urinary tract infection in primary care. However, the evidence presented is in-direct and the difference between mid-stream-clean-catch, mid-stream-urine and random samples remains to be investigated in a paired design to verify the present findings. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-016-0465-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-06-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4898352/ /pubmed/27278078 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-016-0465-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Holm, Anne Aabenhus, Rune Urine sampling techniques in symptomatic primary-care patients: a diagnostic accuracy review |
title | Urine sampling techniques in symptomatic primary-care patients: a diagnostic accuracy review |
title_full | Urine sampling techniques in symptomatic primary-care patients: a diagnostic accuracy review |
title_fullStr | Urine sampling techniques in symptomatic primary-care patients: a diagnostic accuracy review |
title_full_unstemmed | Urine sampling techniques in symptomatic primary-care patients: a diagnostic accuracy review |
title_short | Urine sampling techniques in symptomatic primary-care patients: a diagnostic accuracy review |
title_sort | urine sampling techniques in symptomatic primary-care patients: a diagnostic accuracy review |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4898352/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27278078 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-016-0465-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT holmanne urinesamplingtechniquesinsymptomaticprimarycarepatientsadiagnosticaccuracyreview AT aabenhusrune urinesamplingtechniquesinsymptomaticprimarycarepatientsadiagnosticaccuracyreview |