Disappointing dipstick screening for urinary tract infection in hospital inpatients

Z Zaman, A Borremans, J Verhaegen, L Verbist and N Blanckaert
University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium Central Clinical Laboratory, Belgium. zahur.zaman@uz.kuleuven.ac.be

AIM: To compare the performance of leucocyte esterase and nitrite dipstick tests with microscopic examination and culture of first morning urines (n = 420) of hospital inpatients. RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value of the leucocyte esterase test for the cutoff of > 10 WBC/microliter were 57%, 94%, and 68%, respectively. For > 5 WBC per high power field (HPF) these variables were 84%, 90%, and 93%. For > 10(5) colony counts/ml, the sensitivity of the nitrite test was 27%, specificity 94%, and negative predictive value 87%. When either leucocyte esterase or nitrite positivity was accepted as a marker of urinary tract infection, the sensitivity was 78%, specificity 75%, and negative predictive value 94%, and there were 22% false negative results. Semiquantitative microscopic estimation of bacteria per HPF yielded 40% false positives. CONCLUSIONS: Leucocyte esterase and nitrite dipstick tests are not suitable for screening for urinary tract infections.
CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Goldstein, F. (2006). Comment on: Urinary tract infections in general practice patients: diagnostic tests versus bacteriological culture. J Antimicrob Chemother 58: 902-903 [Full Text]  
• Patel, H D, Livsey, S A, Swann, R A, Bukhari, S S (2005). Can urine dipstick testing for urinary tract infection at point of care reduce laboratory workload?. J. Clin. Pathol. 58: 951-954 [Abstract] [Full Text]