Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Original article

Vol. 142 No. 1314 (2012)

Evaluation of a novel in-vitro diagnostic device for the detection of urinary tract infections in diaper-wearing children

  • Jean-Daniel Krähenbühl
  • Chantal Beaulieu
  • Mario Gehri
DOI
https://doi.org/10.4414/smw.2012.13560
Cite this as:
Swiss Med Wkly. 2012;142:w13560
Published
25.03.2012

Summary

QUESTIONS: Is the novel in-vitro diagnostic device U-Test® reliable and secure for urine collection in diaper-wearing children and simultaneous evaluation of the urine collected for the presence of leucocytes and nitrite?

METHODS: The qualitative and functional performance of U-Test® was evaluated in a multicentre prospective clinical trial. The diagnostic performance of the novel in-vitro diagnostic device was determined in reference to the established procedure involving urine sampling by urine-bag, clean-catch, catheterisation and suprapubic aspiration followed by dipstick analysis and urine culture, and in an in-vitro study.

RESULTS: U-Test® proved to be comfortable and secure for the child and well accepted by the persons responsible for the participating children. No undesired side-effects were seen and in 75.8% (95% CI ± 10.5%; n = 66) of the tests used, enough urine was collected within the permitted time for immediate and successful urine analysis by the integrated test card. Diagnostic performance was found to be comparable to the established procedure using dipstick analysis (leucocytes: κ-coefficient 0.86; nitrite: κ-coefficient 0.74; n = 150). Sensitivity of the U-Test® for leucocyte detection was found to be 96.7% and specificity 100.0%. For nitrite detection sensitivity of 90.0% and specificity of 98.3% were found.

CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation shows that U-Test® is a safe and reliable device of high functionality and diagnostic performance for the detection of leucocytes and nitrite directly and without time delay in a child’s diaper. This statement is based on a comprehensive comparison of the novel device with accepted diagnostic test systems and procedures based on the same dry chemistry technology. Due to its simplicity of use, U-Test® can be considered an alternative to the cumbersome procedures of urine collection by the bag-method or clean-catch followed by dipstick analysis for the presence of leucocytes and nitrite.

References

  1. Coulthard MG, Lambert HJ, Keir MJ. Occurrence of renal scars in children after their first referral for urinary tract infection. BMJ. 1997;315:918–9.
  2. Kennedy K, Glynn L, Dineen B. A survey of the management of urinary tract infection in children in primary care and comparison with the NICE guidelines. BMC Family Practice. 2010;11:6.
  3. Girardin E. Behandlung der Harnwegsinfektionen beim Kind. Paediatrica. 2008;19:17–21.
  4. Urinary tract infection in children. 2007. (Accessed at http://guidance.nice.org.uk/cg054.)
  5. Subcommittee on Urinary Tract Infection SCoQI, Management. Urinary tract infection: clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and management of the initial UTI in febrile infants and children 2 to 24 Months. Pediatrics. 128:595–610.
  6. Whiting P, Westwood M, Bojke L, Palmer S, Richardson G, Cooper J, et al. Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of tests for the diagnosis and investigation of urinary tract infection in children: a systematic review and economic model. Health Technol Assess. 2006;10:1–154.
  7. Macfarlane PI, Ellis R, Hughes C, Houghton C, Lord R. Urine collection pads: are samples reliable for urine biochemistry and microscopy? Pediatr Nephrol. 2005;20:170–9.
  8. Coulthard M, Vernon SJ. JAN Forum: your views and letters. J Adv Nurs. 2002;39:199–200.
  9. Feasey S. Are Newcastle urine collection pads suitable as a means of collecting specimens from infants? Paediatr Nurs. 1999;11:17–21.
  10. Lewis J. Clean-catch versus urine collection pads: a prospective trial. Paediatr Nurs. 1998;10:15–6.
  11. Liaw L, Nayar D, Pedler S, Coulthard M. Home collection of urine for culture from infants by three methods: survey of parents' preferences and bacterial contamination rates. Br Med J. 2000;320:1312–3.
  12. Weiss C. Basiswissen Medizinische Statistik. 4 ed. Heidelberg: Springer Medizin Verlag; 2008.
  13. Spence J, Ross J. Diagnosing urinary tract infections in febrile infants and children: when evidence-based medicine and clinical practice collide. CJEM. 2000;2:197–200.
  14. Crofton P, Squires N, Davidson D, Henderson P, Taheri S. Reliability of urine collection pads for routine and metabolic biochemistry in infants and young children. Eur J Pediatr. 2008;167:1313–9.
  15. Etoubleau Cc, Reveret M, Brouet D, Badier I, Brosset P, Fourcade L, et al. Moving from bag to catheter for urine collection in non-toilet-trained children suspected of having urinary tract infection: A paired comparison of urine cultures. J Pediatr. 2009;154:803–6.
  16. Alper BS, Curry SH. Urinary tract infection in children. Am Fam Physician. 2005;72:2483–8.
  17. McGillivray D, Mok E, Mulrooney E, Kramer MS. A head-to-head comparison: “clean-void” bag versus catheter urinalysis in the ciagnosis of urinary tract infection in young children. J Pediatr. 2005;147:451–6.
  18. Armengol CE, Hendley JO, Schlager TA. Should we abandon standard microscopy when screening for urinary tract infections in young children? Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2001;20:1176–7.
  19. Craig JC. Urinary tract infection: new perspectives on a common disease. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2001;14:309–13.
  20. Bulloch B, Bausher JC, Pomerantz WJ, Connors JM, Mahabee-Gittens M, Dowd MD. Can urine clarity exclude the diagnosis of urinary tract infection? Pediatrics. 2000;106:e60.
  21. Wahl RA, Shapiro E, Elliott SP, Binkiewicz AIS. Office laboratory procedures, office economics, parenting and parent education, and urinary tract infection. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2001;13:603–15.
  22. Wammanda RD, Aikhionbare HA, Ogala WN. Use of nitrite dipstick test in the screening for urinary tract infection in children. West Afr J Med. 2000;19:206–8.
  23. Doley A, Nelligan M. Is a negative dipstick urinalysis good enough to exclude urinary tract infection in paediatric emergency department patients? Emerg Med. (Fremantle) 2003;15:77–80.
  24. Yuen SF, Ng FN, So LY. Evaluation of the accuracy of leukocyte esterase testing to detect pyuria in young febrile children: prospective study. Hong Kong Med J. 2001;7:5–8.
  25. Mori R, Yonemoto N, Fitzgerald A, Tullus K, Verrier-Jones K, Lakhanpaul M. Diagnostic performance of urine dipstick testing in children with suspected UTI: a systematic review of relationship with age and comparison with microscopy. Acta Pædiatrica. 2010;99:581–4.

Most read articles by the same author(s)