You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 146 No. 3, March 1992 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ARTICLES
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

The Case Against Screening Urinalyses for Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Children

Kathi J. Kemper, MD, MPH; Ellis D. Avner, MD

Am J Dis Child. 1992;146(3):343-346.


Abstract

• Screening children for asymptomatic bacteriuria to prevent pyelonephritis and renal scarring is widely recommended, but its cost-effectiveness has not been established. We reviewed published studies to determine the costs and benefits of screening toilet-trained, asymptomatic children for bacteriuria. Given the sensitivity and specificity of current screening methods (approximately 80% each) and the prevalence of bacteriuria in asymptomatic children (approximately 1% in girls and 0.03% in boys), screening 100 000 children would result in 19 897 (20%) false-positive tests; initial screening and two urine cultures to confirm the diagnosis of asymptomatic bacteriuria would miss 28% of 515 children with true bacteriuria, and cost nearly $2.9 million. There is no evidence that detection and treatment of children with asymptomatic bacteriuria prevents subsequent pyelonephritis or renal scarring. Screening for bacteriuria in asymptomatic children is costly, fails to prevent pyelonephritis or renal scarring, and should be discontinued as a part of routine well-child care.

(AJDC. 1992;146:343-346)



Author Affiliations

From the Departments of Pediatrics, University of Washington (Drs Kemper and Avner), Children's Hospital and Medical Center (Dr Avner), and Harborview Medical Center (Dr Kemper), Seattle, Wash.


Footnotes

Accepted for publication October 7, 1991.

Reprint requests to Harborview Medical Center, Department of Pediatrics, Room ZA-53, 325 Ninth Ave, Seattle, WA 98104 (Dr Kemper).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Screening Dipstick Urinalysis: A Time to Change
Kaplan et al.
Pediatrics 1997;100:919-921.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

ROUTINE SCREENING FOR BACTERIURIA IN CHILDREN IS QUESTIONED
JWatch General 1992;1992:3-3.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1992 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.