» Articles » PMID: 6991523

Rapid Semiautomated Screening and Processing of Urine Specimens

Overview
Specialty Microbiology
Date 1980 Mar 1
PMID 6991523
Citations 20
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

A rapid urine culture procedure was evaluated in which positive urines were detected by using light-scatter photometry (Autobac). Specimens were analyzed at 3, 5, and 6 h. Specimens detected as positive at 3 h were then further evaluated by a direct 3-h susceptibility procedure (Autobac) and by a 4-h identification procedure (Micro-ID). Of 949 specimens, 175 had >10(5) colony-forming units per ml by colony count. Of these latter specimens, 75.4% had been detected by 3 h, and 95.4% were detected by 6 h. Of specimens positive by Autobac at 3 h, 96% (95.7%) had >10(5) colony-forming units per ml. If pure by Gram stain, those positive specimens were inoculated to direct susceptibility and identification systems. When direct Autobac susceptibilities were compared with the standard Autobac method done from the plate the following day, discrepancy rates were 1.3% very major, 2.1% major, and 7.4% total. The direct identifications were 94% (94.2%) correct when using the Micro-ID manual and a collection of octal patterns unique to this system, in which urine/broth culture inoculum was employed instead of the usual organism colony suspension. Those urine specimens negative after screening at 3 h were evaluated at 5 and 6 h, and an additional 126 specimens were detected as positive. These were then processed by routine plate inoculation, due to the limitations of the work day. By 6 h, 95.4% of specimens with >10(5) colony-forming units per ml were detected. The 4.6% false-negative results consisted of patients on antibiotics, or slowly growing bacteria suspected of being distal urethral contaminants. Thus, 83.5% of the urine cultures received by 9:00 a.m. (10.6% 3-h positives and 72.9% negative at 6 h) could be evaluated and reported within one 8-h work day.

Citing Articles

Clinical Validation of Innovative Optical-Sensor-Based, Low-Cost, Rapid Diagnostic Test to Reduce Antimicrobial Resistance.

Kapur S, Gehani M, Kammili N, Bhardwaj P, Nag V, Devara S J Clin Med. 2019; 8(12).

PMID: 31805738 PMC: 6947486. DOI: 10.3390/jcm8122098.


New and developing diagnostic technologies for urinary tract infections.

Davenport M, Mach K, Shortliffe L, Banaei N, Wang T, Liao J Nat Rev Urol. 2017; 14(5):296-310.

PMID: 28248946 PMC: 5473291. DOI: 10.1038/nrurol.2017.20.


Direct antimicrobial susceptibility testing for acute urinary tract infections in women.

Johnson J, Tiu F, Stamm W J Clin Microbiol. 1995; 33(9):2316-23.

PMID: 7494020 PMC: 228402. DOI: 10.1128/jcm.33.9.2316-2323.1995.


Screening of urine cultures by three automated systems.

Pezzlo M, Tan G, Peterson E, de la Maza L J Clin Microbiol. 1982; 15(3):468-74.

PMID: 7076820 PMC: 272119. DOI: 10.1128/jcm.15.3.468-474.1982.


Evaluation of Gram-stain screen and Micro-ID methods for direct identification of Enterobacteriaceae from urines.

Appelbaum P, Olmstead C Med Microbiol Immunol. 1982; 170(3):173-84.

PMID: 7043229 DOI: 10.1007/BF02298197.


References
1.
Thornsberry C, Gavan T, SHERRIS J, BALOWS A, Matsen J, Sabath L . Laboratory evaluation of a rapid, automatic susceptibility testing system: report of a collaborative study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1975; 7(4):466-80. PMC: 429164. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.7.4.466. View

2.
Aldridge K, Gardner B, Clark S, Matsen J . Comparison of micro-ID, API 20E, and conventional media systems in identification of Enterobacteriaceae. J Clin Microbiol. 1978; 7(6):507-13. PMC: 275051. DOI: 10.1128/jcm.7.6.507-513.1978. View

3.
Smith D, Lorber R, Stanford L, Loop M . Visual acuity following binocular deprivation in the cat. Brain Res. 1980; 183(1):1-11. DOI: 10.1016/0006-8993(80)90115-8. View

4.
KASS E . Bacteriuria and the diagnosis of infections of the urinary tract; with observations on the use of methionine as a urinary antiseptic. AMA Arch Intern Med. 1957; 100(5):709-14. DOI: 10.1001/archinte.1957.00260110025004. View