外置尿液收集装置能否减少有尿路感染症状女性尿液样本的污染？一项系统评价。
Do external urine collection devices reduce contamination in urine samples for women with symptoms of urinary tract infection? A systematic review.
作者信息
Moragas Ana, García-Sangenís Ana, Llor Carl
机构信息
University Institute in Primary Care Research Jordi Gol, CIBER de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Barcelona, Spain; Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Jaume I Health Centre, Catalan Institute of Health, Tarragona, Spain.
University Institute in Primary Care Research Jordi Gol, CIBER de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Barcelona, Spain; Medicines Research Unit, Institut de Recerca en Atencio Primaria Jordi Gol, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.
出版信息
Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin (Engl Ed). 2023 Aug-Sep;41(7):426-429. doi: 10.1016/j.eimce.2022.04.012. Epub 2023 Jan 25.
INTRODUCTION
To evaluate the impact of external urine collection devices (UCD) on contamination of urine samples in women with symptoms of urinary tract infection.
METHODS
This review was conducted according to the Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy guidelines (PROSPERO CRD42021241758). PubMed was searched for paired sample studies and controlled trials. Studies comparing UCDs with non-invasive urine collection procedures were considered.
RESULTS
Only two studies were found. Neither of the two studies found any difference regarding contamination between specimens collected with the UCDs compared and non-invasive techniques. In the largest study, including 1264 symptomatic women, 18.8% of those allocated to UCDs failed to collect urine samples successfully.
CONCLUSIONS
More studies involving women with symptoms of urinary tract infection are needed to produce more robust data on the impact of these devices on urine contamination rates.
引言
评估外部尿液收集装置（UCD）对有尿路感染症状女性尿液样本污染的影响。
方法
本综述依据诊断试验准确性系统评价指南（PROSPERO CRD42021241758）进行。在PubMed上检索配对样本研究和对照试验。纳入比较UCD与非侵入性尿液收集程序的研究。
结果
仅找到两项研究。这两项研究均未发现与UCD收集的样本相比，非侵入性技术在样本污染方面存在差异。在规模最大的研究中，纳入了1264名有症状的女性，分配使用UCD的人群中有18.8%未能成功收集尿液样本。
结论
需要开展更多涉及有尿路感染症状女性的研究，以获取关于这些装置对尿液污染率影响的更可靠数据。
Zotero 插件