You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 5, Issue 4
  • The Uriscreen test was not better than standard urinalysis and dipstick tests for detecting urinary tract infection in children

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Diagnosis
The Uriscreen test was not better than standard urinalysis and dipstick tests for detecting urinary tract infection in children

https://doi.org/10.1136/ebm.5.4.126

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    (1999) Pediatrics 104, e41. Waisman Y, Zerem E, Amir L, et al. . The validity of the Uriscreen test for early detection of urinary tract infection in children. . . Oct;. :. ..
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text

    
 
 QUESTION: Is the Uriscreen test better than standard urinalysis and dipstick tests for early detection of urinary tract infection (UTI) in children?

    Design

    Independent comparisons of Uriscreen, urinalysis, and dipstick tests with quantitative urine culture.

    Setting

    Emergency department of a children's hospital in Israel.

    Participants

    A random sample of 121 children (68% girls) who were 1 month to 17 years of age and who presented to the emergency department with symptoms of UTI. Symptoms for infants were fever with no apparent source, vomiting, decreased appetite, and irritability; for toddlers, abdominal pain and frequent voiding with or without fever; and for older children, dysuria, frequency, urgency, and abdominal or flank pain with or without fever. The exclusion criterion was use …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Source of funding: no external funding.

    • For correspondence: Dr Y Waisman, Unit of Emergency Medicine, Schneider Children's Medical Center of Israel, 14 Kaplan Street, Petah Tiqva, Israel 49202. Fax + 972 3 922 3011.