PEDIATRICS Vol. 86 No. 3 September 1990, pp. 345-349
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow P3Rs: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when P3Rs are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mitchell, N.
Right arrow Articles by Stapleton, F. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mitchell, N.
Right arrow Articles by Stapleton, F. B.

Routine Admission Urinalysis Examination in Pediatric Patients: A Poor Value

Nancy Mitchell MD1 and F. Bruder Stapleton MD1

1 Department of Pediatrics, University of Tennessee, and LeBonheur Children's Medical Center, Memphis

The urinalysis has long been considered an important screening test for hospitalized children. The value of the admission urinalyses, required by hospital bylaws, was assessed for detecting urinary tract disease in children admitted to a day-care unit or impatient medical or surgical services during the months of June and November 1987. Of 2695 admissions, urinalyses were considered essential for diagnosis or therapy in 543 patients (excluded from analysis). In the remaining 2152 patients eligible for screening, urinalyses were obtained in 145 (30%) of day-care unit and 587 (35%) of inpatient admissions. The results of 149 (20%) of screening urinalyses were abnormal (23% abnormal in inpatient and 10% abnormal in day-care unit admissions). The numbers of urinalyses with abnormal results were similar in surgical and medical admissions and between the months of June and November. Pyuria (90 patients) and hematuria (66 patients) were the most common abnormalities in initial urinalyses. Follow-up urinalyses and other diagnostic studies were obtained in 38% of patients with abnormal admission urinalysis results. In subsequent urinalyses, 58% showed persistent abnormalities; however, most subsequent abnormal results were not pursued with additional tests. Urinary tract infections were diagnosed in 6 patients. No other additional diagnoses were determined. The cost of initial urinalyses and subsequent diagnostic studies in these 732 patients during the 2 months was $23 465. The cost per diagnosis of urinary infection was $3911. It is concluded that when hospital bylaws require routine urinalyses at the time of admission, this requirement is frequently ignored and, in addition, abnormal results are often unappreciated or not pursued. In the medical center studied, this screening test was costly and had little apparent benefit in detecting renal disease.

Submitted on April 3, 1989
Accepted on February 28, 1990




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 CLIN PEDIATRHome page
J. Chandar, O. Gomez-Marin, R. del Pozo, L. Sanders, B. Montane, C. Abitbol, J. Strauss, and G. Zilleruelo
Role of Routine Urinalysis in Asymptomatic Pediatric Patients
Clinical Pediatrics, January 1, 2005; 44(1): 43 - 48.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
R. E. Kaplan, J. E. Springate, and L. G. Feld
Screening Dipstick Urinalysis: A Time to Change
Pediatrics, December 1, 1997; 100(6): 919 - 921.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JWatch GeneralHome page
ROUTINE URINALYSIS OF HOSPITALIZED CHILDREN IS OF LITTLE BENEFIT
Journal Watch (General), September 25, 1990; 1990(925): 10 - 10.
[Full Text]