ACLS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Madan, E
Right arrow Articles by Blackwell, J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Madan, E
Right arrow Articles by Blackwell, J
Annals of Clinical and Laboratory Science, Vol 18, Issue 2, 116-119
Copyright © 1988 by Association of Clinical Scientists


Articles

Urine screening: an alternative to urine cultures

E Madan, H Quittner, and J Blackwell

Urine cultures represent one of the most commonly submitted specimens to a microbiology laboratory. In an attempt to manage effectively this type of specimen, Bac-T-Screen (BTS), nitrate and leukoestrase test were performed on all clean catch urine specimens sent for culture. Three hundred and four specimens were screened by these methods. The BTS, by itself, had the highest sensitivity, and specificity (92 percent and 81 percent, respectively) and the lowest false negative rate (9.8 percent) of the three tests. A combination BTS/leukoestrase test increased specificity (99 percent), but the sensitivity was only 73 percent.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1988 by the Association of Clinical Scientists.