J Clin Pathol Qual Control.  2001 Jun;23(1):239-246.

Comparative Evaluation of Dipstick Urinalysis by Dipstick Readers

• Park HR
• Jeong BK
• Park NW

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Routine urinalysis using dipstick reader is one of the most fundamental and informative tests in the clinical laboratory. So, we evaluated the efficiency of two semiautomated dipstick readers and their strips by comparing urinalysis results.
METHODS
Dipstick urinalysis was carried out by Uriscan Pro using Gen 10 SGL strips and Clinitek 500 using Multistix 10 SG strips. Within-run and between-run precisions, and accuracy were determined by using commercial control materials, Uritrol Level l, ll, lll and Check-stix negative, positive. The correlation study, and the sensitivity and specificity for occult blood and leukocytes were evaluated from 445 patients' samples. The simultaneous microscopic urinalysis was performed.
RESULTS
Within-run and between-run precision of Uriscan Pro were 40 to 100%, 60 to 100% respectively; Clinitek 500 were 60 to 100%, 50 to 100% respectively. Accuracy of Uriscan Pro and Clinitek 500 were 60 to 100%, 100% respectively. A good agreement was obtained in most items of both dipsticks except nitrite. The sensitivity and specificity for occult blood, and the specificity for leukocytes were good in both dipsticks ; however, the sensitivity for leukocytes was low in both dipsticks.
CONCLUSIONS
These two dipstick readers and their strips may lead to a clinically acceptable urinalysis. But further study on cases of discrepant nitrite analysis (negative for Gen 10 SGL ; positive for Multistix 10 SG) is needed. Dipstick testing for leukocytes is not satisfactory as a screening urinalysis, so simultaneous microscopic sediment urinalysis is necessary ; however, recently developed automated urinary sediment analyzer will improve efficiency of urinalysis in the near future.

MeSH Terms

Leukocytes
Mass Screening
Occult Blood
Sensitivity and Specificity
Statistics as Topic
Urinalysis*