• Online Features  This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

ALBERT L. MEHL, MD
Colorado Permanente Medical Group 2525 13th St Boulder, CO 80304

Am J Dis Child. 1990;144(10):1073-1074.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Sir.—In the February 1990 issue of AJDC, Klevan and DeJong¹ reported that from a group of 428 sexual-abuse victims, only 2 were found to have a urinary tract infection (UTI). They concluded correctly that routine screening for UTI is not indicated for all victims of sexual abuse.

More importantly, however, the authors overlooked the pertinent question, specifically whether UTI may be an indicator of sexual abuse. The study design, as with Reinhart's previous study,² instead measures whether sexual abuse is an indicator of UTI. A similar study of patients with cystic fibrosis, for example, might find on examination that no patient had rectal prolapse, and investigators would conclude that rectal prolapse is not an indicator of cystic fibrosis. A urologist might be interested in answering the question, "If a child presents with sexual abuse, is the child at risk for UTI?" Most clinicians, however, would ask, "If . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Delicious    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?