Departments of Epidemiology and Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, and the Departments of Medical Microbiology and Internal Medicine, Division Infectious Disease, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Feb;121(2 Pt 1):299-305. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31827e8cfe.
To estimate and compare contamination rates of three different urine-sampling methods in pregnant women to assess bacteriuria.
In this cross-sectional study, 113 pregnant women collected three different midstream urine samples consecutively: morning (first void); midstream (void without further instructions); and clean-catch sample (void after cleaning). The following end points were considered contaminants: epithelial cells, Gram-positive rods or mixed bacteria in the Gram stain, and mixed growth or skin flora in the urine culture. Intraindividual variability in contaminants was quantified with Fleiss-Cohen's weighted κ statistic. Differences between samples were assessed using generalized estimating equations.
Mainly low numbers of Gram-positive rods were more likely to be present in Gram stains of midstream samples compared with clean-catch samples (77.7% compared with 66.7%, P=.022). Morning samples showed more mixed growth compared with midstream samples (6.2% compared with 0.9%, P=.050). No consistency in quantity of contaminants was found in midstream samples compared with morning and clean-catch samples. No differences were found between the other end points in all three urine samples (P>.05). The study could detect an odds ratios of 2.0 for differences in urine-sampling methods with 80% power and 5% significance for most end points.
In pregnant women, the contamination rate of midstream samples is comparable with the contamination rates of morning and clean-catch samples. The quantity of contaminants varied among the three samples collected by one woman. These results show that more complex, unpractical, and time-consuming morning and clean-catch samples are not superior. Therefore, we recommend a midstream sample to assess bacteriuria in pregnant women.
II.
评估并比较三种不同孕妇中段尿样采集方法的污染率,以评估菌尿情况。
在这项横断面研究中,113 名孕妇连续采集三种不同的中段尿样:晨尿(首次排空);中段尿(无进一步指导的排空);以及清洁采集尿样(清洁后排空)。以下视为污染物:革兰氏染色中的上皮细胞、革兰氏阳性杆菌或混合细菌,以及尿液培养中的混合生长或皮肤菌群。使用 Fleiss-Cohen 的加权 κ 统计量来量化个体内污染物的变异性。使用广义估计方程评估样本间的差异。
与清洁采集尿样相比,中段尿样的革兰氏染色中更可能存在少量革兰氏阳性杆菌(77.7% 比 66.7%,P=.022)。与中段尿样相比,晨尿样本显示出更多的混合生长(6.2% 比 0.9%,P=.050)。在中段尿样中未发现与晨尿和清洁采集尿样相比,污染物数量存在一致性。在所有三种尿样中,其他终点之间均未发现差异(P>.05)。该研究可以检测到尿液采样方法差异的优势比为 2.0,对于大多数终点,具有 80%的功效和 5%的显著性。
在孕妇中,中段尿样的污染率与晨尿和清洁采集尿样的污染率相当。一名女性采集的三种样本中污染物的数量存在差异。这些结果表明,更复杂、不切实际且耗时的晨尿和清洁采集尿样并不优越。因此,我们建议使用中段尿样来评估孕妇的菌尿情况。
II。