The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Dipsticks and diagnostic algorithms in urinary tract infection: development and validation, randomised trial, economic analysis, observational cohort and qualitative study

Dipsticks and diagnostic algorithms in urinary tract infection: development and validation, randomised trial, economic analysis, observational cohort and qualitative study
Dipsticks and diagnostic algorithms in urinary tract infection: development and validation, randomised trial, economic analysis, observational cohort and qualitative study
Objectives: to estimate clinical and dipstick predictors of infection and develop and test clinical scores; to compare management using clinical and dipstick scores with commonly used alternative strategies; to estimate the cost-effectiveness of each strategy; and to understand the natural history of urinary tract infection (UTI) and women's concerns about its presentation and management.

Design: there were six studies: (1) validation development for diagnostic clinical and dipstick scores; (2) validation of the scores developed; (3) observation of the natural history of UTI; (4) randomised controlled trial (RCT) of scores developed in study 1; (5) economic analysis of the RCT; (6) qualitative study of patients in the RCT.

Setting: primary care.

Participants: women aged 17-70 with suspected UTI.

Interventions: patients were randomised to five management approaches: empirical antibiotics; empirical delayed antibiotics; target antibiotics based on a higher symptom score; target antibiotics based on dipstick results; or target antibiotics based on a positive mid-stream specimen of urine (MSU).

Main outcome measures: antibiotic use, use of MSUs, rates of reconsultation and duration, and severity of symptoms.

Results: (1) 62.5% of women had confirmed UTI. Only nitrite, leucocyte esterase and blood independently predicted diagnosis of UTI. A dipstick rule--based on having nitrite or both leucocytes and blood--was moderately sensitive (77%) and specific (70%) [positive predictive value (PPV) 81%, negative predictive value (NPV) 65%]. A clinical rule--based on having two of urine cloudiness, offensive smell, reported moderately severe dysuria, moderately severe nocturia--was less sensitive (65%) (specificity 69%, PPV 77%, NPV 54%). (2) 66% of women had confirmed UTI. The predictive values of nitrite, leucocyte esterase and blood were confirmed. The dipstick rule was moderately sensitive (75%) but less specific (66%) (PPV 81%, NPV 57%). (3) Symptoms rated as moderately bad or worse lasted 3.25 days on average for infections sensitive to antibiotics; resistant infections lasted 56% longer, infections not treated with antibiotics 62% longer and symptoms associated with urethral syndrome 33% longer. Symptom duration was shorter if the doctor was perceived to be positive about prognosis, and longer with frequent somatic symptoms, previous history of cystitis, urinary frequency and more severe symptoms at baseline. (4) 66% of the MSU group had laboratory-confirmed UTI. Women suffered 3.5 days of moderately bad symptoms if they took antibiotics immediately but 4.8 days if they delayed taking antibiotics for 48 hours. Taking bicarbonate or cranberry juice had no effect. (5) The MSU group was more costly over 1 month but not over 1 year. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that for a value per day of moderately bad symptoms of over 10 pounds, the dipstick strategy is most likely to be cost-effective. (6) Fear of spread to the kidneys, blood in the urine, and the impact of symptoms on vocational and leisure activities were important triggers for seeking help. When patients are asked to delay taking antibiotics the uncomfortable and worrying journey from 'person to patient' needs to be acknowledged and the rationale behind delaying the antibiotics made clear.

Conclusions: to achieve good symptom control and reduce antibiotic use clinicians should either offer a 48-hour delayed antibiotic prescription to be used at the patient's discretion or target antibiotic treatment by dipsticks (positive nitrite or positive leucocytes and blood) with the offer of a delayed prescription if dipstick results are negative.
1366-5278
1-96
Little, P.
1bf2d1f7-200c-47a5-ab16-fe5a8756a777
Turner, S.
42f19397-8e9f-435d-a348-2cc1639b5eb4
Rumsby, K.
2002ee8a-32ac-4119-869d-ed35164c3b51
Warner, G.
a7c8d450-67a4-46c9-ad1e-4a17d6816590
Moore, M.
1be81dad-7120-45f0-bbed-f3b0cc0cfe99
Lowes, J.A.
eff6751b-62b6-4755-a92e-b1c6e03db3b6
Smith, H.
cc42a332-71ec-436f-8207-9151275a92d8
Hawke, C.
a10de6c7-ee96-4ea1-aa75-571dd87d1e63
Turner, D.
dbe8594a-d211-4efe-abec-46a6e0451623
Leydon, G.M.
c5cdaff5-0fa1-4d38-b575-b97c2892ec40
Arscott, A.
22f3cd24-cae2-4d04-afec-1d1aae62a2b1
Mullee, M.
fd3f91c3-5e95-4f56-8d73-260824eeb362
Little, P.
1bf2d1f7-200c-47a5-ab16-fe5a8756a777
Turner, S.
42f19397-8e9f-435d-a348-2cc1639b5eb4
Rumsby, K.
2002ee8a-32ac-4119-869d-ed35164c3b51
Warner, G.
a7c8d450-67a4-46c9-ad1e-4a17d6816590
Moore, M.
1be81dad-7120-45f0-bbed-f3b0cc0cfe99
Lowes, J.A.
eff6751b-62b6-4755-a92e-b1c6e03db3b6
Smith, H.
cc42a332-71ec-436f-8207-9151275a92d8
Hawke, C.
a10de6c7-ee96-4ea1-aa75-571dd87d1e63
Turner, D.
dbe8594a-d211-4efe-abec-46a6e0451623
Leydon, G.M.
c5cdaff5-0fa1-4d38-b575-b97c2892ec40
Arscott, A.
22f3cd24-cae2-4d04-afec-1d1aae62a2b1
Mullee, M.
fd3f91c3-5e95-4f56-8d73-260824eeb362

Little, P., Turner, S., Rumsby, K., Warner, G., Moore, M., Lowes, J.A., Smith, H., Hawke, C., Turner, D., Leydon, G.M., Arscott, A. and Mullee, M. (2009) Dipsticks and diagnostic algorithms in urinary tract infection: development and validation, randomised trial, economic analysis, observational cohort and qualitative study. Health Technology Assessment, 13 (19), 1-96. (doi:10.3310/hta13190). (PMID:19364448)

Record type: Article

Abstract

Objectives: to estimate clinical and dipstick predictors of infection and develop and test clinical scores; to compare management using clinical and dipstick scores with commonly used alternative strategies; to estimate the cost-effectiveness of each strategy; and to understand the natural history of urinary tract infection (UTI) and women's concerns about its presentation and management.

Design: there were six studies: (1) validation development for diagnostic clinical and dipstick scores; (2) validation of the scores developed; (3) observation of the natural history of UTI; (4) randomised controlled trial (RCT) of scores developed in study 1; (5) economic analysis of the RCT; (6) qualitative study of patients in the RCT.

Setting: primary care.

Participants: women aged 17-70 with suspected UTI.

Interventions: patients were randomised to five management approaches: empirical antibiotics; empirical delayed antibiotics; target antibiotics based on a higher symptom score; target antibiotics based on dipstick results; or target antibiotics based on a positive mid-stream specimen of urine (MSU).

Main outcome measures: antibiotic use, use of MSUs, rates of reconsultation and duration, and severity of symptoms.

Results: (1) 62.5% of women had confirmed UTI. Only nitrite, leucocyte esterase and blood independently predicted diagnosis of UTI. A dipstick rule--based on having nitrite or both leucocytes and blood--was moderately sensitive (77%) and specific (70%) [positive predictive value (PPV) 81%, negative predictive value (NPV) 65%]. A clinical rule--based on having two of urine cloudiness, offensive smell, reported moderately severe dysuria, moderately severe nocturia--was less sensitive (65%) (specificity 69%, PPV 77%, NPV 54%). (2) 66% of women had confirmed UTI. The predictive values of nitrite, leucocyte esterase and blood were confirmed. The dipstick rule was moderately sensitive (75%) but less specific (66%) (PPV 81%, NPV 57%). (3) Symptoms rated as moderately bad or worse lasted 3.25 days on average for infections sensitive to antibiotics; resistant infections lasted 56% longer, infections not treated with antibiotics 62% longer and symptoms associated with urethral syndrome 33% longer. Symptom duration was shorter if the doctor was perceived to be positive about prognosis, and longer with frequent somatic symptoms, previous history of cystitis, urinary frequency and more severe symptoms at baseline. (4) 66% of the MSU group had laboratory-confirmed UTI. Women suffered 3.5 days of moderately bad symptoms if they took antibiotics immediately but 4.8 days if they delayed taking antibiotics for 48 hours. Taking bicarbonate or cranberry juice had no effect. (5) The MSU group was more costly over 1 month but not over 1 year. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that for a value per day of moderately bad symptoms of over 10 pounds, the dipstick strategy is most likely to be cost-effective. (6) Fear of spread to the kidneys, blood in the urine, and the impact of symptoms on vocational and leisure activities were important triggers for seeking help. When patients are asked to delay taking antibiotics the uncomfortable and worrying journey from 'person to patient' needs to be acknowledged and the rationale behind delaying the antibiotics made clear.

Conclusions: to achieve good symptom control and reduce antibiotic use clinicians should either offer a 48-hour delayed antibiotic prescription to be used at the patient's discretion or target antibiotic treatment by dipsticks (positive nitrite or positive leucocytes and blood) with the offer of a delayed prescription if dipstick results are negative.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: March 2009

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 73432
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/73432
ISSN: 1366-5278
PURE UUID: b06f2683-893b-4f26-b5fa-2a71dc28ce2b
ORCID for P. Little: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-3664-1873
ORCID for K. Rumsby: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-8573-3718
ORCID for M. Moore: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-5127-4509
ORCID for G.M. Leydon: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-5986-3300

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 08 Mar 2010
Last modified: 11 Jul 2024 01:43

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: P. Little ORCID iD
Author: S. Turner
Author: K. Rumsby ORCID iD
Author: G. Warner
Author: M. Moore ORCID iD
Author: J.A. Lowes
Author: H. Smith
Author: C. Hawke
Author: D. Turner
Author: G.M. Leydon ORCID iD
Author: A. Arscott
Author: M. Mullee

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×