Systematic review of the validity of urine cultures collected by sterile perineal bags

Sangrador, Carlos Ochoa; Terrazas, A. Pascual

doi:10.1016/j.anpede.2015.10.011

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In pre‐continent children, there are three acceptable methods for urine sampling for culture: clean catch (CC), transurethral bladder catheterisation (TUBC) and suprapubic aspiration (SPA). Sterile bag collection is widely used for urinalysis but is unsatisfactory for bacteriological culture due to high contamination rates (approximately 50%) 8–10 . An optimal urine sampling method for paediatric urine culture should have high sensitivity and specificity, low contamination rate and should be noninvasive and quick.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Contamination rates of different methods of urine culture collection in children: A retrospective cohort study

Guri

Florenthal

Scheier

et al. 2021

J Paediatrics Child Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim Urinary tract infection is a common cause of paediatric morbidity. However, there is no consensus on the default method for urine culture collection in children. This study aimed to examine the contamination rates of different urine collection methods. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study in a paediatric emergency department. Data were collected from electronic health records on all children whose urine culture samples were obtained in the paediatric emergency department between March 2018 and March 2019. Different methods of urine collection included the midstream (MS) method, clean catch (CC), transurethral bladder catheterisation and suprapubic aspiration. Contamination rates and positive urine culture rates were calculated and compared for sex, age, and collection method. Results Urine culture samples were collected from 1507 children. There were 284 (18.8%) cultures that were positive with significant growth and 52 (3.5%) that were defined as ‘contaminated’. The contamination rates for the midstream method in toilet‐trained children were 1.6% (10/609), 4.9% (17/348) for CC in pre‐continent children, 4.9% (25/515) for transurethral bladder catheterisation and 0% (0/35) (P = 0.006) for suprapubic aspiration. There was no significant difference in contamination rates of urine cultures collected by CC and catheterisation in the compared groups. The rates of positive cultures in the subgroup of children with high suspicion for Urinary tract infection were also found to be similar. Conclusions Our study shows that CC is non‐inferior to catheterisation for collecting urine cultures in young children.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Contamination rates of different methods of urine culture collection in children: A retrospective cohort study

Guri

Florenthal

Scheier

et al. 2021

J Paediatrics Child Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[11] Non-invasive methods for urine collection is regarded as practical, easy and acceptable method for urine collection for children who do not require urgent treatment [6] Urine collection bags are often used [12,13] but have unacceptably high false positive and contamination rates. [7,14] The recommended method of urine collection by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines is Clean catch urine collection [15] but this involves long waiting time for a nappy free child to void spontaneously. There are multiple methods of urine collection in infants, including vibrating bladder stimulator, [16] lumbar or bladder stimulation [17] but efficacy of these methods are still unknown.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quick-Wee method Versus Standard method for urine collection in infants 1-12 month old

Malla

Singh²,

Chaudhary

et al. 2021

Nep. Mediciti Med. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Urinary Tract infections [UTI] often presents with fever and nonspecific findings in infants less than one year. So urine sample collection is mandatory for diagnosis or exclusion. Collecting Urine sample is very challenging in infants and choosing the method of collection must balance the reliability, speed and contamination. Clinical guidelines have different recommendations so there is a need for reliable collection method. Therefore this study was conducted to determine if a simple stimulation method (Quick–wee Method) increases the rate of clean catch voiding of urine within five minutes. METHODS: A prospective age and sex matched case control study in 1-12 months children conducted from June 2017 – June 2018 in Pediatric ward of Manipal college of medical sciences, Pokhara, after Ethical clearance from Institutional review Board [IRB]. The study population was randomized to either clean catch midstream urine with stimulation [Quick–Wee method] or without stimulation [Standard method]. The primary outcome was voiding of urine within 5 minute. Secondary outcome were waiting time for voiding, successful collection, parental satisfaction, and contamination. The analysis was done using SPSS version 20 and a ‘p’value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Waiting time for voiding in Quick wee group was less and statistically significant compared to standard group. There was 10% increment in voiding within 5 minutes in Quick wee group . It had higher successful urine collection rate (91.4%), slightly higher contamination rate (14.28%) but better parental satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Quick wee method is easy, reliable, successful method of urine collection in infants with better parental satisfaction and slightly higher contamination rate.

show abstract

“…A meta-analysis of 21 studies (7659 samples) found 47% contamination and 61% false positives with urine bags. 4 Clean catch The clean catch method for pre-continent young children replicates the midstream technique used in continent older children and adults. The nappy is removed, and a clinician or carer waits with a specimen jar, ready to opportunistically catch a sample when the child voids.…”

Section: Non-invasive Collection Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Urine sample collection from young pre-continent children: common methods and the new Quick-Wee technique

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Systematic review of the validity of urine cultures collected by sterile perineal bags

Cited by 10 publications

References 27 publications

Contamination rates of different methods of urine culture collection in children: A retrospective cohort study

Contamination rates of different methods of urine culture collection in children: A retrospective cohort study

Quick-Wee method Versus Standard method for urine collection in infants 1-12 month old

Urine sample collection from young pre-continent children: common methods and the new Quick-Wee technique

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About