50 research outputs found

    Does clinical examination aid in the diagnosis of urinary tract infections in women? A systematic review and meta-analysis

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Clinicians should be aware of the diagnostic values of various symptoms, signs and antecedents. This information is particularly important in primary care settings, where sophisticated diagnostic approaches are not always feasible. The aim of the study is to determine the probability that various symptoms, signs, antecedents and tests predict urinary tract infection (UTI) in women.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a systematic search of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases to identify articles published in all languages through until December 2008. We particularly focused on studies that examined the diagnostic accuracy of at least one symptom, sign or patient antecedent related to the urinary tract. We included studies where urine culture, a gold standard, was preformed by primary care providers on female subjects aged at least 14 years. A meta-analysis of the likelihood ratio was performed to assess variables related to the urinary tract symptoms.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 1, 212 articles identified, 11 met the selection criteria. Dysuria, urgency, nocturia, sexual activity and urgency with dysuria were weak predictors of urinary tract infection, whereas increases in vaginal discharge and suprapubic pain were weak predictors of the absence of infection. Nitrites or leukocytes in the dipstick test are the only findings that clearly favored a diagnosis of UTI.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Clinical findings do not aid in the diagnosis of UTI among women who present with urinary symptoms. Vaginal discharge is a weak indicator of the absence of infection. The urine dipstick test was the most reliable tool for detecting UTI.</p

    Organizational readiness assessment in acute and long-term care has important implications for antibiotic stewardship for asymptomatic bacteriuria

    No full text
    BackgroundPrior to implementing an antibiotic stewardship intervention for asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB), we assessed institutional barriers to change using the Organizational Readiness to Change Assessment.MethodsSurveys were self-administered on paper in inpatient medicine and long-term care units at 4 Veterans Affairs facilities. Participants included providers, nurses, and pharmacists. The survey included 7 subscales: evidence (perceived strength of evidence) and six context subscales (favorability of organizational context). Responses were scored on a 5-point Likert-type scale.ResultsOne hundred four surveys were completed (response rate = 69.3%). Overall, the evidence subscale had the highest score; the resources subscale (mean 2.8) was significantly lower than other subscales (P &lt; .001). Scores for budget and staffing resources were lower than scores for training and facility resources (P &lt; .001 for both). Pharmacists had lower scores than providers for the staff culture subscale (P = .04). The site with the lowest scores for resources (mean 2.4) also had lower scores for leadership and lower pharmacist effort devoted to stewardship.ConclusionsAlthough healthcare professionals endorsed the evidence about nontreatment of ASB, perceived barriers to antibiotic stewardship included inadequate resources and leadership support. These findings provide targets for tailoring the stewardship intervention to maximize success
    corecore