HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Graham, J C Articles by Galloway, A Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Graham, J C Articles by Galloway, A Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Urinary Tract Infections

ACP Best Practice No 167

The laboratory diagnosis of urinary tract infection

Clinical Microbiology Laboratory, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Queen Victoria Road, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 4LP, UK

Dr Galloway angela.galloway{at}nuth.northy.nhs.uk Urinary tract infection is common, and it is not surprising that urine specimens make up a large proportion of those samples submitted to the routine diagnostic laboratory. Many of these specimens will show no evidence of infection and several methods can be used to screen out negative samples. Those that grow bacteria need to be carefully assessed to quantify the degree of bacteriuria and hence clinical relevance. To influence treatment, a final report should be produced within 24 hours of specimen receipt, with turnaround times continuously monitored. Much work needs to be done to determine the cost effectiveness involved in processing urine specimens and the evidence base for the final report provided.

Key Words: laboratory diagnosis • urinary tract infection

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R Evans, M M Davidson, L R W Sim, and A J Hay Testing by Sysmex UF-100 flow cytometer and with bacterial culture in a diagnostic laboratory: a comparison. J. Clin. Pathol., June 1, 2006; 59(6): 661 - 662. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. J. Holden, M. Totsika, E. Mahler, A. J. Roe, K. Catherwood, K. Lindner, U. Dobrindt, and D. L. Gally Demonstration of regulatory cross-talk between P fimbriae and type 1 fimbriae in uropathogenic Escherichia coli. Microbiology, April 1, 2006; 152(Pt 4): 1143 - 1153. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W S Smellie, J O Forth, C A M McNulty, L Hirschowitz, D Lilic, R Gosling, D Bareford, E Logan, K G Kerr, G P Spickett, et al. Best practice in primary care pathology: review 2 J. Clin. Pathol., February 1, 2006; 59(2): 113 - 120. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. A. D'Souza, M. Campbell, and E. J. Baron Practical Bench Comparison of BBL CHROMagar Orientation and Standard Two-Plate Media for Urine Cultures J. Clin. Microbiol., January 1, 2004; 42(1): 60 - 64. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D Fallon, G Ackland, N Andrews, D Frodsham, S Howe, K Howells, K J Nye, and R E Warren A comparison of the performance of commercially available chromogenic agars for the isolation and presumptive identification of organisms from urine J. Clin. Pathol., August 1, 2003; 56(8): 608 - 612. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P J van Diest, H Holzel, M Reid, M Crook, and G Spickett Electronic publishing and internet learning J. Clin. Pathol., December 1, 2002; 55(12): 881 - 882. [Full Text] [PDF]