Screening for Bacteriuria in Pregnancy

Lawson, David H.; Miller, Alistair W. F.

doi:10.1001/archinte.1973.03650120102019

Cited by 14 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has bccn advocated on three grounds. to detect patients with underlying renal abnormality this has been critically appraised by Lawson & Miller (1973) who emphasized that the true value of such a routine screening procedure for this purpose has yet to be proven. This initial observation by Kass (1962) has been the subject of many studies, reviewed by Beard & Roherts (1968) who considered it unlikely to be a major causative factor.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This initial observation by Kass (1962) has been the subject of many studies, reviewed by Beard & Roherts (1968) who considered it unlikely to be a major causative factor. Lawson 8 Miller (1971) questioned the value of such a screening procedure and were more emphatic in a subsequent paper (Lawson & Miller 1973): 'There is no justification for the suggestion that the results of a single MSU can be used as a prediction of subsequent U1'1 in that pregnancy'. to detect patients with underlying renal abnormality this has been critically appraised by Lawson & Miller (1973) who emphasized that the true value of such a routine screening procedure for this purpose has yet to be proven.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Second. to detect patients with underlying renal abnormality this has been critically appraised by Lawson & Miller (1973) who emphasized that the true value of such a routine screening procedure for this purpose has yet to be proven. Third, to predict patients at risk of developing clinical urinary tract infection in pregnancy.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…as pointed out by Dixon & Brant (1967) and by Swapp (1973), only a small proportion of patients with bacteriuria develop urinary tract infection and the majority of patients with urinary tract infection do not have bacteriuria on routine screening at booking. Lawson 8 Miller (1971) questioned the value of such a screening procedure and were more emphatic in a subsequent paper (Lawson & Miller 1973): 'There is no justification for the suggestion that the results of a single MSU can be used as a prediction of subsequent U1'1 in that pregnancy'.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Antenatal Prediction of Urinary Tract Infection in Pregnancy

Chng

Hall

1982

Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prediction of urinary tract infection in pregnancy by bacteriuria testing is unsatisfactory; if resources are short, the taking of a careful history of previous urinary tract infection is almost as effective. Restriction of bacteriuria testing to the women with such a history would b e more economical than routine testing and would give better specificity (but not sensitivity) than bacteriuria testing o r history taking alone.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations