Skip to main content

Some NLM-NCBI services and products are experiencing heavy traffic, which may affect performance and availability. We apologize for the inconvenience and appreciate your patience. For assistance, please contact our Help Desk at info@ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.

Journal of Clinical Pathology logoLink to Journal of Clinical Pathology
. 1976 Apr;29(4):286–291. doi: 10.1136/jcp.29.4.286

Comparison of laboratory methods in the diagnosis of urinary tract infection.

B I Duerden, A Moyes
PMCID: PMC476048  PMID: 777041

Abstract

Three methods of semiquantitative culture and two techniques of microscopy were compared with a surface viable count for the detection of significant bacteriuria in one thousand midstream specimens of urine. The results obtained with the blotting-paper-strip method on MacConkey agar and with Uricult dip-slides correlated well with the results of the surface viable count, and both methods were suitable for routine use. The blotting-paper-strip method was preferred for laboratory use because of expense but dip-slides are useful for general practice and outpatient clinics. Semi-quantitative culture by Microstix dip-strips gave less accurate results, and the nitrite test area detected only a small proportion of infected specimens. The microscopic examination of a Gram-stained film of the centrifuged deposit of urine specimens yielded more useful information and was more reproducible than examination of a wet film of the untreated urine.

Full text

PDF
286

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Craig W. A., Kunin C. M., DeGroot J. Evaluation of new urinary tract infection screening devices. Appl Microbiol. 1973 Aug;26(2):196–201. doi: 10.1128/am.26.2.196-201.1973. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Guttmann D., Naylor G. R. Dip-slide: an aid to quantitative urine culture in general practice. Br Med J. 1967 Aug 5;3(5561):343–345. doi: 10.1136/bmj.3.5561.343. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. KASS E. H. Asymptomatic infections of the urinary tract. Trans Assoc Am Physicians. 1956;69:56–64. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. KASS E. H. Bacteriuria and the diagnosis of infections of the urinary tract; with observations on the use of methionine as a urinary antiseptic. AMA Arch Intern Med. 1957 Nov;100(5):709–714. doi: 10.1001/archinte.1957.00260110025004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. LEIGH D. A., WILLIAMS J. D. METHOD FOR THE DETECTION OF SIGNIFICANT BACTERIURIA IN LARGE GROUPS OF PATIENTS. J Clin Pathol. 1964 Sep;17:498–503. doi: 10.1136/jcp.17.5.498. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. McDonald P. J., Furness E. T., Beasley N. V. Dip-slide diagnosis of urinary tract infection. Med J Aust. 1972 Jan 1;1(1):20–23. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1972.tb46676.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. McGeachie J., Kennedy A. C. Simplified quantitative methods for bacteriuria and pyuria. J Clin Pathol. 1963 Jan;16(1):32–38. doi: 10.1136/jcp.16.1.32. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. RENGARTS R. Asymptomatic bacilluria in sixty-eight diabetic patients. Am J Med Sci. 1960 Feb;239:159–164. doi: 10.1097/00000441-196002000-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. RYAN W. L., HOODY S., LUBY R. A simple quantitative test for bacteriuria. J Urol. 1962 Dec;88:838–840. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)64892-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. SLEIGH J. D. DETECTION OF BACTERIURIA BY A MODIFICATION OF THE NITRITE TEST. Br Med J. 1965 Mar 20;1(5437):765–767. doi: 10.1136/bmj.1.5437.765. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Clinical Pathology are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES