Two machines, the Clinitek 200 and the Rapimat II/T, were evaluated for their ability to screen urine samples for significant bacteriuria and other elements indicative of urinary tract pathology. The automated screening procedures were compared with a conventional approach of microscopy and quantitative culture for 1020 urine specimens obtained from patients in a 700 bed general hospital. When compared with the bacterial culture method both machines gave identical results with a negative predictive value of 0.99, while when compared with microscopy alone the Clinitek 200 and Rapimat II/T gave negative predictive values of 0.92 and 0.87, respectively. It is concluded that both machines would provide cost effective screening of urine specimens.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bowman et al. (1991) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: