Sultana R V, Zalstein S, Cameron P, Campbell D
Department of Emergency Medicine, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
J Emerg Med. 2001 Jan;20(1):13-9. doi: 10.1016/s0736-4679(00)00290-0.
The aim of this study was to determine whether dipstick urinalysis (DU) augmented the accuracy of clinical assessment in the diagnosis of urinary tract infection (UTI). The study was performed in 627 consecutive patients attending an adult emergency department (ED) in whom the clinical diagnosis of UTI was considered. We excluded 227 patients. Treating clinicians gave the probability of a UTI on an ordinal and continuous scale, before and after DU. The assigned clinical probabilities were then compared to the results of formal urine culture. The areas under receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUC) were calculated. We found that clinical assessment alone was effective in detecting those patients with a UTI from those without (AUC 0.75; p < 0.0001). There was, however, a statistically significant difference in the accuracy of diagnosing UTI after DU (AUC 0.87; p < 0.0001). Proportionately more patients with a moderate pre-test probability of UTI were re-assigned to a different probability rating following DU, compared to the low or high pre-test probability groups (p < 0.001). We conclude that DU in combination with clinical assessment is a superior method for diagnosing UTI than clinical assessment alone.
本研究的目的是确定试纸条尿液分析(DU)是否能提高尿路感染(UTI)诊断中临床评估的准确性。该研究在627例连续就诊于成人急诊科(ED)且被考虑临床诊断为UTI的患者中进行。我们排除了227例患者。主治医生在进行DU前后,分别以有序和连续量表给出UTI的可能性。然后将指定的临床可能性与正式尿培养结果进行比较。计算受试者操作特征曲线(AUC)下的面积。我们发现,仅临床评估就能有效地从无UTI的患者中检测出有UTI的患者(AUC 0.75;p<0.0001)。然而,DU后UTI诊断准确性存在统计学显著差异(AUC 0.87;p<0.0001)。与低或高预测试概率组相比,UTI预测试概率中等的患者在DU后被重新分配到不同概率等级的比例更高(p<0.001)。我们得出结论,与单独的临床评估相比,DU联合临床评估是诊断UTI的更优方法。