title: Validating the prediction of lower urinary tract infection in primary care: sensitivity and specificity of urinary dipsticks and clinical scores in women.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Dipsticks are one of the most commonly used near-patient tests in primary care, but few clinical or dipstick algorithms have been rigorously developed.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To confirm whether previously documented clinical and dipstick variables and algorithms predict laboratory diagnosis of urinary tract infection (UTI).
  
  
  METHODS
  Validation study.
  
  
  METHODS
  Primary care.
  
  
  METHODS
  A total of 434 adult females with suspected lower UTI had bacteriuria assessed using the European Urinalysis Guidelines.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Sixty-six per cent of patients had confirmed UTI. The predictive values of nitrite, leucocyte esterase (+ or greater), and blood (haemolysed trace or greater) were confirmed (independent multivariate odds ratios = 5.6, 3.5, and 2.1 respectively). The previously developed dipstick rule--based on presence of nitrite, or both leucocytes and blood-- was moderately sensitive (75%) but less specific (66%; positive predictive value [PPV] 81%, negative predictive value [NPV] 57%). Predictive values were improved by varying the cut-off point: NPV was 76% for all three dipstick results being negative; the PPV was 92% for having nitrite and either blood or leucocyte esterase. Urine offensive smell was not found to be predictive in this sample; for a clinical score using the remaining three predictive clinical features (urine cloudiness, dysuria, and nocturia), NPV was 67% for none of the features, and PPV was 82% for three features.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  A clinical score is of limited value in increasing diagnostic precision. Dipstick results can modestly improve diagnostic precision but poorly rule out infection. Clinicians need strategies to take account of poor NPVs.
authors.affiliation: Community Clinical Sciences Division, University of Southampton, Aldermoor Health Centre, Aldermoor Close, Southampton. p.little@soton.ac.uk
authors.forename: Paul
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Little
authors.forename: Sheila
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Turner
authors.forename: Kate
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Rumsby
authors.forename: Rachel
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Jones
authors.forename: Greg
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Warner
authors.forename: Michael
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Moore
authors.forename: J Andrew
authors.initials: JA
authors.lastname: Lowes
authors.forename: Helen
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Smith
authors.forename: Catherine
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Hawke
authors.forename: Geraldine
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Leydon
authors.forename: Mark
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Mullee
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D019411:Clinical Laboratory Techniques / Q000592:standards; D004739:England; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008875:Middle Aged; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D011934:Reagent Strips; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D016482:Urinalysis / Q000592:standards; D014552:Urinary Tract Infections / Q000175:diagnosis*; D055815:Young Adult
chemical_list: D011934:Reagent Strips