Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34438392›Full record

ArticleUrologia internationalis2022

Impact of Male Patient Information on Quality of Urine Examination (PIQUE Study).

Philipp J Spachmann, Cathrin Rupp, Hans-Martin Fritsche, Stefan Denzinger, Maximilian Burger, Johannes Breyer, Wolfgang Otto, Marco J Schnabel

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Urologia internationalis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Philipp J SpachmannDepartment of Urology, University of Regensburg, Caritas St. Josef Medical Center, Regensburg, Germany.
Cathrin RuppDepartment of Urology, University of Regensburg, Caritas St. Josef Medical Center, Regensburg, Germany.
Hans-Martin FritscheDepartment of Urology, University of Regensburg, Caritas St. Josef Medical Center, Regensburg, Germany.
Stefan DenzingerDepartment of Urology, University of Regensburg, Caritas St. Josef Medical Center, Regensburg, Germany.
Maximilian BurgerDepartment of Urology, University of Regensburg, Caritas St. Josef Medical Center, Regensburg, Germany.
Johannes BreyerDepartment of Urology, University of Regensburg, Caritas St. Josef Medical Center, Regensburg, Germany.
Wolfgang OttoDepartment of Urology, University of Regensburg, Caritas St. Josef Medical Center, Regensburg, Germany.
Marco J SchnabelDepartment of Urology, University of Regensburg, Caritas St. Josef Medical Center, Regensburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUrine examination has relevance for treatment, and reliability of positive urine culture (UC) is of importance. The technique of urine sampling (US), storage, and transportation is important. The objective of this study was to investigate if detailed patient information for the technique of US and hygiene reduces rates of contaminated UC in screened male patients, as this group was not investigated yet.

methodsAll patients independently of complaints were enrolled prospectively and consecutively in an outpatient setting in 2 groups - the first group did not receive detailed information and the second group did. We examined 372 consecutive patients in 2017, 190 not receiving (median age 69 years) and 182 receiving information (median age 70 years), with comparable numbers of patients and age. The result of UC and age was imposed.

resultsIn all,74.2% of preclarification UC showed a contamination (n = 95) and 75.5% after clarification (n = 83), without significant differences (p = 0.827). This study is limited by the fact that adherence could not be checked.

conclusionsSimilar to studies with females, no difference occurred in rates of contaminated UC, so detailed information regarding the US technique does not decrease rates of contaminated UC and vice versa does not increase the quality of midstream-sampled UC in male patients.

Indexed as

Urinary Tract InfectionsAgedFemaleHumansHygieneMaleReproducibility of ResultsSpecimen HandlingUrinalysisUrineAntibiotic stewardshipMidstream urineUrinary tract infectionUrine cultureUrine culture contamination

Identifiers

PMID34438392
PMCPMC8984995

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.