The clean catch technique for urine collection in infants and young children

Lack of clinical utility of urine gram stain for suspected urinary tract infection in pediatric patients

Urinary tract infection (UTI) is one of the most common infections in children. Urine culture remains the gold standard for diagnosis, but the utility of urine Gram stain relative to urinalysis (UA) is unclear. We reviewed 312 pediatric patients with suspected UTI who had urine culture, UA, and urine Gram stain performed from a single urine specimen. UA was considered positive if ≥10 leukocytes per oil immersion field were seen or if either nitrates or leukocyte esterase testing was positive. Urine Gram stain was considered positive if any organisms were seen. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated using urine culture as the gold standard. Thirty-seven (12%) patients had a culture-proven UTI. Compared to urine Gram stain, UA had equal sensitivity (97.3% versus 97.5%) and higher specificity (85% versus 74%). Empirical therapy was prescribed before the Gram stain result was known in 40 (49%) patients and after in 42 (51%) patients. The antibiotics chosen did not differ between the two groups (P=0.81), nor did they differ for patients with Gram-negative rods on urine Gram stain compared to those with Gram-positive cocci (P=0.67). From these data, we conclude that UA has excellent negative predictive value that is not enhanced by urine Gram stain and that antibiotic selection did not vary based on the urine Gram stain result. In conclusion, the clinical utility of urine Gram stain does not warrant the time or cost it requires.

Urine-sampling methods for environmental chemicals in infants and young children

This review paper examines and evaluates urine-sampling methodologies in infants and young children, to determine which methods are suitable for use in large biomonitoring surveys or studies of environmental chemicals in children younger than 6 years. Methods for non-toilet-trained children include the use of urine bags, collection pads (e.g., cotton or gauze inserts), disposable diapers, cotton diapers, and the clean catch method. In toilet-trained children, collection methods include use of a commode insert pan as well as specimen collection cups. The advantages and disadvantages of these various methods need to be evaluated with respect to the target population, timing and frequency of collection, minimum sample volume required, method of urine extraction, potential for contamination of the sample, stability of the analyte of interest, and burden on participants and research team. Collection methods must not introduce contamination or affect the integrity of the sample, should be logistically practical, and should minimize discomfort experienced by the child. Although collection of urine samples from children who are not toilet-trained is more challenging than collection from older toilet-trained children, the vulnerability of younger children to the exposure to and health effects of environmental chemicals makes finding suitable methods a priority.