Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Clinical Pathology logoLink to Journal of Clinical Pathology
. 1997 Jul;50(7):569–572. doi: 10.1136/jcp.50.7.569

A urine analysis method suitable for children's nappies.

A Edwards 1, J van der Voort 1, R Newcombe 1, H Thayer 1, K Verrier Jones 1
PMCID: PMC500054  PMID: 9306937

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Urinary tract infection in infancy continues to be underdiagnosed, despite its association with renal scarring and thus hypertension, renal failure, and other sequelae. Low ascertainment of urinary tract infections reflects the many difficulties in establishing a diagnosis, some of which could be eliminated by a simple, reliable method for preliminary investigation of children's urine. AIM: To assess the accuracy of a new, simple method for testing urine for nitrite and leucocyte esterase, which could be applied to children in primary care. METHODS: An in vitro study was carried out to compare the results of conventional urine analysis with urine analysis on urine soaked on to panty-liners, and with the laboratory investigation. Two urine analysis stick types were used (Boehringer Mannheim Nephur sticks and Bayer Multistix 8SG) and two brands of panty-liners. Analysis examined evidence of agreement and bias for different methods in addition to sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive values for urine analysis. RESULTS: Pressing urine analysis test sticks on to panty-liners soaked with urine achieved consistent results compared with the results of conventional dipstick urine analysis. At a prevalence of 21.8%, sensitivity and negative predictive values of urine analysis for laboratory confirmed urinary tract infection were 94% and 98%, respectively, for Boehringer sticks, and 76% and 93%, respectively, for Bayer sticks. At prevalences of 5% and 1% (prevalences that could be expected in primary care) Bayer sticks had negative predictive values of 98.7% and 99.7%, respectively, and Boehringer sticks had values of 99.6% and 99.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Testing urine on panty-liners is accurate compared with conventional urine analysis. It may be possible to apply this method to testing unwell children presenting in primary care to identify those who require microbiological urine culture to confirm or eliminate a diagnosis of urinary tract infection.

Full text

PDF
569

Selected References

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

  1. Berg U. B., Johansson S. B. Age as a main determinant of renal functional damage in urinary tract infection. Arch Dis Child. 1983 Dec;58(12):963–969. doi: 10.1136/adc.58.12.963. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Ditchburn R. K., Ditchburn J. S. A study of microscopical and chemical tests for the rapid diagnosis of urinary tract infections in general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 1990 Oct;40(339):406–408. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Edwards A., Granier S., van der Voort J. Usefulness of urine dipstick tests. Packaging may lead to false positive results. BMJ. 1996 Oct 19;313(7063):1010–1010. doi: 10.1136/bmj.313.7063.1010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Hashmi P., Ho C., Morgan S., Stephenson J. R. Routine urinalysis in renal transplant patients. J Clin Pathol. 1995 Apr;48(4):383–384. doi: 10.1136/jcp.48.4.383. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Hiraoka M., Hida Y., Hori C., Tuchida S., Kuroda M., Sudo M. Rapid dipstick test for diagnosis of urinary tract infection. Acta Paediatr Jpn. 1994 Aug;36(4):379–382. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-200x.1994.tb03205.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hoberman A., Chao H. P., Keller D. M., Hickey R., Davis H. W., Ellis D. Prevalence of urinary tract infection in febrile infants. J Pediatr. 1993 Jul;123(1):17–23. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3476(05)81531-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Jakobsson B., Berg U., Svensson L. Renal scarring after acute pyelonephritis. Arch Dis Child. 1994 Feb;70(2):111–115. doi: 10.1136/adc.70.2.111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Lejeune B., Baron R., Guillois B., Mayeux D. Evaluation of a screening test for detecting urinary tract infection in newborns and infants. J Clin Pathol. 1991 Dec;44(12):1029–1030. doi: 10.1136/jcp.44.12.1029. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Miettinen O., Nurminen M. Comparative analysis of two rates. Stat Med. 1985 Apr-Jun;4(2):213–226. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780040211. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Voswinckel P. A marvel of colors and ingredients. The story of urine test strip. Kidney Int Suppl. 1994 Nov;47:S3–S7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Winter A. L., Hardy B. E., Alton D. J., Arbus G. S., Churchill B. M. Acquired renal scars in children. J Urol. 1983 Jun;129(6):1190–1194. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)52634-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Woodward M. N., Griffiths D. M. Use of dipsticks for routine analysis of urine from children with acute abdominal pain. BMJ. 1993 Jun 5;306(6891):1512–1512. doi: 10.1136/bmj.306.6891.1512. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. van der Voort J., Edwards A., Roberts R., Verrier Jones K. The struggle to diagnose UTI in children under two in primary care. Fam Pract. 1997 Feb;14(1):44–48. doi: 10.1093/fampra/14.1.44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES