首页> 外文期刊>Urological research >Diagnostic value and cost utility analysis for urine Gram stain and urine microscopic examination as screening tests for urinary tract infection.
【24h】

Diagnostic value and cost utility analysis for urine Gram stain and urine microscopic examination as screening tests for urinary tract infection.

机译:尿液革兰氏染色和尿液镜检作为尿路感染筛查试验的诊断价值和成本效用分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic properties of urine Gram stain and urine microscopic examination for screening for urinary tract infection (UTI), and to perform an additional cost utility analysis. This descriptive study was performed on 95 urine samples sent for urine culture to the Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University. The first part of the study was to determine the diagnostic properties of two screening tests (urine Gram stain and urine microscopic examination). Urine culture was set as the gold standard and the results from both methods were compared to this. The second part of this study was to perform a cost utility analysis. The sensitivity of urine Gram stain was 96.2%, the specificity 93.0%, the positive predictive value 94.3% and the negative predictive value 95.2%. False positives occurred with a frequency of 7.0% and false negatives 3.8%. For the microscopic examination, the sensitivity was 65.4%, specificity 74.4%, positive predictive value 75.6% and negative predictive value 64.0%. False positives occurred with a frequency of 25.6% and false negatives 34.6%. Combining urine Gram stain and urine microscopic examination, the sensitivity was 98.1%, specificity 74.4%, positive predictive value 82.3% and negative predictive value 97.0%. False positives occurred with a frequency of 25.6% and false negatives 1.9%. However, the cost per utility of the combined method was higher than either urine microscopic examination or urine Gram stain alone. Urine Gram stain provided the lowest cost per utility. Economically, urine Gram stain is the proper screening tool for presumptive diagnosis of UTI.
机译:这项研究的目的是评估尿液革兰氏染色和尿液镜检对尿路感染(UTI)筛查的诊断性能,并进行额外的成本效用分析。这项描述性研究是针对95个尿液样本进行的,这些样本被送往朱拉隆功大学医学院微生物学系进行尿培养。研究的第一部分是确定两种筛查测试(尿液革兰氏染色和尿液镜检)的诊断性能。将尿液培养定为金标准,并将两种方法的结果进行比较。这项研究的第二部分是进行成本效用分析。尿革兰氏染色的敏感性为96.2%,特异性为93.0%,阳性预测值为94.3%,阴性预测值为95.2%。假阳性的发生频率为7.0%,假阴性的发生率为3.8%。显微镜检查的敏感性为65.4%,特异性为74.4%,阳性预测值为75.6%,阴性预测值为64.0%。假阳性的发生频率为25.6%,假阴性的频率为34.6%。结合尿革兰氏染色和尿镜检查,敏感性为98.1%,特异性为74.4%,阳性预测值为82.3%,阴性预测值为97.0%。假阳性的发生率为25.6%,假阴性的发生率为1.9%。但是,组合方法的每项效用成本高于尿液镜检或单独的尿液革兰氏染色。尿液革兰氏染色剂为每个公用事业提供了最低的成本。从经济上来说,尿革兰氏染色是用于UTI推定诊断的合适筛查工具。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号