Cargando…

Women’s information needs around urine testing for urinary tract infections: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is one of the commonest bacterial infections in general practice, with urine testing a frequent feature of its management. Urinary dipsticks are widely used, with urine culture the reference standard test. To avoid contamination, patients are advised to disc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Glogowska, Margaret, Croxson, Caroline, Hayward, Gail
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Royal College of General Practitioners 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8869185/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35190371
http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2021.0564
_version_ 1784656436483063808
author Glogowska, Margaret
Croxson, Caroline
Hayward, Gail
author_facet Glogowska, Margaret
Croxson, Caroline
Hayward, Gail
author_sort Glogowska, Margaret
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is one of the commonest bacterial infections in general practice, with urine testing a frequent feature of its management. Urinary dipsticks are widely used, with urine culture the reference standard test. To avoid contamination, patients are advised to discard the first part of the urine stream, retaining the midstream part for the sample. This process, however, can be challenging both to explain and to perform. There is a lack of literature investigating women’s perceptions and understanding of urine sampling. AIM: To explore women’s understanding of urine collection, sample contamination, and how information from samples informed UTI management. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative study embedded in a UK randomised controlled trial (RCT) of urinary collection devices (UCDs) among women attending primary care with a suspected UTI. METHOD: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 29 women participating in the RCT. Interviews were transcribed and thematically analysed. RESULTS: Participants were not always aware about what midstream samples were and why they were preferable. They also lacked understanding about how urine samples may be contaminated, and sources of contamination. Participants experienced variability in the information received following analysis of their sample. CONCLUSION: Provision of clear information could help provide better urine samples, aiding the diagnosis of UTIs, presenting results with greater clarity, and creating less need for repeat samples. Sharing of information derived from uncontaminated samples may also support better UTI management, helping to reduce unnecessary prescribing and antibiotic resistance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8869185
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Royal College of General Practitioners
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88691852022-03-11 Women’s information needs around urine testing for urinary tract infections: a qualitative study Glogowska, Margaret Croxson, Caroline Hayward, Gail Br J Gen Pract Research BACKGROUND: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is one of the commonest bacterial infections in general practice, with urine testing a frequent feature of its management. Urinary dipsticks are widely used, with urine culture the reference standard test. To avoid contamination, patients are advised to discard the first part of the urine stream, retaining the midstream part for the sample. This process, however, can be challenging both to explain and to perform. There is a lack of literature investigating women’s perceptions and understanding of urine sampling. AIM: To explore women’s understanding of urine collection, sample contamination, and how information from samples informed UTI management. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative study embedded in a UK randomised controlled trial (RCT) of urinary collection devices (UCDs) among women attending primary care with a suspected UTI. METHOD: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 29 women participating in the RCT. Interviews were transcribed and thematically analysed. RESULTS: Participants were not always aware about what midstream samples were and why they were preferable. They also lacked understanding about how urine samples may be contaminated, and sources of contamination. Participants experienced variability in the information received following analysis of their sample. CONCLUSION: Provision of clear information could help provide better urine samples, aiding the diagnosis of UTIs, presenting results with greater clarity, and creating less need for repeat samples. Sharing of information derived from uncontaminated samples may also support better UTI management, helping to reduce unnecessary prescribing and antibiotic resistance. Royal College of General Practitioners 2022-02-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8869185/ /pubmed/35190371 http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2021.0564 Text en © The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is Open Access: CC BY 4.0 licence (http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ).
spellingShingle Research
Glogowska, Margaret
Croxson, Caroline
Hayward, Gail
Women’s information needs around urine testing for urinary tract infections: a qualitative study
title Women’s information needs around urine testing for urinary tract infections: a qualitative study
title_full Women’s information needs around urine testing for urinary tract infections: a qualitative study
title_fullStr Women’s information needs around urine testing for urinary tract infections: a qualitative study
title_full_unstemmed Women’s information needs around urine testing for urinary tract infections: a qualitative study
title_short Women’s information needs around urine testing for urinary tract infections: a qualitative study
title_sort women’s information needs around urine testing for urinary tract infections: a qualitative study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8869185/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35190371
http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2021.0564
work_keys_str_mv AT glogowskamargaret womensinformationneedsaroundurinetestingforurinarytractinfectionsaqualitativestudy
AT croxsoncaroline womensinformationneedsaroundurinetestingforurinarytractinfectionsaqualitativestudy
AT haywardgail womensinformationneedsaroundurinetestingforurinarytractinfectionsaqualitativestudy