کد مقاله کد نشریه سال انتشار مقاله انگلیسی نسخه تمام متن
5619440 1578911 2017 4 صفحه PDF دانلود رایگان
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله ISI
Visual or automated dipstick testing for proteinuria in pregnancy?
ترجمه فارسی عنوان
تست سنجش بصری یا خودکار برای پروتئینوری در دوران بارداری؟
موضوعات مرتبط
علوم پزشکی و سلامت پزشکی و دندانپزشکی کاردیولوژی و پزشکی قلب و عروق
چکیده انگلیسی


- Dipstick urinalysis is the most common method of screening of proteinuria.
- The automated dipstick methods tested are more sensitive than the visual method.
- There is an increase in false positive results in automated methods.
- The performance of visual and automated dipstick is poor-fair as a 'rule-out' test.

ObjectivesTo compare the Multistix 10SG/visual-read with two automated methods (Multistix 10SG/Clinitek 50 and Chemstrip 10A/Urisys 1100) to detect significant proteinuria among high-risk pregnant women.Study designProspective cohort study at British Columbia Women's Hospital & Health Centre, Vancouver, Canada.Main outcome measuresDiagnostic accuracy determined by sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR−).Results303 (89.6%) of 338 women had a urine sample tested by all three dipstick methods. 196 samples (64.7%) were collected in the morning (subsequent to their first void) and from outpatients. 107 samples (35.3%) were from inpatients at various times throughout the day. A PrCr ⩾30 mg/mmol was present in 46 (15.2%) samples. The sensitivity for proteinuria was higher with Multistix 10SG/Clinitek 50 (65.2%) than with Multistix 10SG/visual-read (41.3%, p < 0.001) or Chemstrip 10A/Urisys 1100 (54.3%, p = 0.06). Specificity was >90% for all methods studied, although it was highest for Multistix 10SG/visual-read (98.4%) compared with either Multistix 10SG/Clinitek 50 (92.6%, p < 0.001) or Chemstrip 10A/Urisys 1100 (95.7%, p = 0.04). For all methods, LR+ was good-excellent (>5), but LR− poor-fair (>0.20). 29 samples were discordant for proteinuria between methods. 28/29 women had negative proteinuria by Multistix 10SG/visual-read, but at least 1+ proteinuria by an automated method; 17/28 were false positives and 11/28 true positives.ConclusionsAutomated dipstick methods are more sensitive than visual urinalysis for proteinuria, but test performance is still only poor-fair as a 'rule-out' test for proteinuria. Whether the enhanced sensitivity would be worth the false positives, cost, and personnel training remains to be determined for detection of low-level proteinuria in pregnancy.

ناشر
Database: Elsevier - ScienceDirect (ساینس دایرکت)
Journal: Pregnancy Hypertension: An International Journal of Women's Cardiovascular Health - Volume 7, January 2017, Pages 50-53
نویسندگان
, , , , , , ,