Urine sampling techniques in symptomatic primary-care patients: a diagnostic accuracy review

BMC Primary Care

Table 1 Characteristics of included studies

Study	Setting	Design	Patients (n)	Incidence	Technique	Cutoff index^a	Cutoff reference^a
Hooton 2013	Outpatient clinic	Paired samples	202^b	0.70	MSCC vs. Cat	≥10 cfu/ml	≥10 cfu/ml
Lifshitz 2000	University clinic	RCT	242	0.55	Random vs. MSCC^c	≥ 10² cfu/ml	≥ 10² cfu/ml
Baerheim 1990	General practice	Paired samples	73	0.74	Home vs. MSCC	≥ 10⁴ cfu/ml	≥ 10⁴ cfu/ml
Walter 1989	Outpatient clinic	Paired samples	105	0.40	MSCC vs. Cat	≥ 10⁵ cfu/ml	≥ 10⁵ cfu/ml
Bradbury 1988	General practice	RCT	158	0.25	MSU vs. MSCC	> 10⁵ cfu/ml	> 10⁵ cfu/ml
Stamm 1982	Outpatient clinic/student clinic	Paired samples	187	0.52	MSCC vs. Cat/Sup	Reporting absolute counts	≥10 cfu/ml
Mabeck 1969	Outpatient clinic	Paired samples	95	-	MSCC vs. Sup	Reporting absolute counts	Reporting absolute numbers

Detailed legend: Characteristics of included studies. ^aThe definition has been simplified. ^bReporting the number of samples not patients. ^cMSCC and MSCC + vaginal tampoon. RCT Randomized controlled trial; MSCC Mid-stream-clean-catch; MSU Mid-stream-urine; Cat Urethral Catheterization; SUP suprapubic puncture; cfu colony-forming units

ISSN: 2731-4553