PEDIATRICS Vol. 98 No. 4 October 1996, pp. 798-799
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 CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Adcock, P. M.
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, G. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Adcock, P. M.
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, G. S.

Urine Latex Agglutination Tests

Penny M. Adcock MD1, Ronald I. Paul MD1, and Gary S. Marshall MD1

1 Department of Pediatrics, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, KY 40292

We recently presented data suggesting that urine latex agglutination (ULA) tests had little effect on the management of febrile children at risk for invasive bacterial infection, in that treatment and disposition decisions were driven by clinical factors rather than test results.1 While our paper was in press, data from another center were published yielding similar conclusions.2

We report herein that the diagnostic behavior of clinicians at our children's hospital appears to have been affected by logical arguments against ULA testing and data supporting those arguments (these data were presented to the medical staff and residents several years before publication of the paper).