Urinary glucose unreliable as test for urinary tract infection in infancy

Abstract

. Urinary glucose unreliable as test for urinary tract infection in infancy. We tested the reliability of a paper strip test for urinary glucose in the diagnosis of urinary tract infection in babies. Though In recent years a number of studies revealed that the incidence of urinary tract infection in newborn babies lies between 030 3 and 27 % (James, 1959;Lincoln and Winberg, 1964;Smellie et al., 1964;O'Brien et al., 1968;Littlewood, Kite, and Kite, 1969;Abbott, 1972). The most commonly reported figure is 1.00% to 15 % with a preponderance of male infants, and the ninefold range of incidence is at least partly explained by differences in collection technique and criteria of diagnosis. It has become clear that collection of urine from babies for quantitative bacterial culture is a matter of some difficulty. The most widely used technique employing adhesive plastic bags is reported to yield grossly contaminated specimens in a high proportion of cases (Houston, 1963;Lam et al., 1967;Newman, O'Neill, and Parker, 1967

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of tests for the diagnosis and investigation of urinary tract infection in children: a systematic review and economic model

“…Sensitivity was also very high (over 98%) in three studies, but was only 64% in the fourth study. 56 Positive likelihood ratios ranged from 27.8 (LR-0.07) to 166.2 (LR-0.02) with a pooled estimate of 66.3 (95% CI 20.0 to 219.6). Negative likelihood ratios ranged from 0.02 (LR+ 166.2 and 113.7) to 0.36 (LR+ 32.5), with a pooled estimate of 0.07 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.83).…”

“…56,71,99,106 These test strips are not currently commercially available. Currently ), using a colour change at this threshold.…”

“…56 Two of the other studies were conducted in screening settings 71,99 and one was conducted in a high-risk group. 106 The study reporting a low sensitivity was conducted in children aged less than 1 year, whereas the other three studies were conducted in children 3 years of age or more.…”

“…One study provided estimates of test performance for two different groups of children. 56 The first group of children were healthy newborns, whereas the second group consisted of children with a suspected UTI. Only the results from the second group of children are included in the analysis as these are more similar to the children included in the other studies and are also more similar to the children in whom the test will be used in practice.…”