Abstract:Abstract Background Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) is one of the second common infections among the geriatric population. It is more common in women than men and the incidence increases with age. UTI can cause serious complications and it is a significant cause of morbidity and death. The high mortality rate is largely due to delayed presentation and the development of bacteremia/sepsis. Physicians rely heavily on urinalysis to diagnose UTI, and it is one of the most frequently requested tests; however, the need to reflect to urine culture became more in demand to cut the cost of test not needed without the sacrificing of patient care. Methodology 4307 urine samples were collected for urinalysis and culture from residents in Long-Term Care Facilities (LTCF) over a period of 5 weeks. Urinalysis and microscopy were done using IQ WORKCELL automated system. All the specimens were cultured; the culture was done using MicroScan Walkaway96 conventional panels. We used urine culture as the reference standard, no growth or <10 000 colony-forming unit/mL were considered negative, cultures with >50 000 colonies colony-forming unit/mL were considered positive. UA is considered positive if it was positive leukocyte esterase, WBC > 5, nitrate, or had >moderate bacteria. We compared positive UA to the culture outcome. Statistical analyses were done using Analyse-it. Results Women represented 64.7% of the samples tested; the positivity rate was 49.2% (52.3% for women and 43.4% for men) and 7.0% of the all the cultures had mixed flora. Urinalysis identified 3038 as positive UA, only 1941 (63.9%) had positive culture and 846 (43.6%) had negative culture. Urinalysis identified 1269 samples as negative, 176 samples (13.9%) of them had positive culture. Conclusion The use of negative urinalyses to reflex to culture would help eliminating the majority of the cultures that are not necessary. However, avoiding the culture will risk missing infection in 13.9% of the negative urinalysis samples. In addition, more than one third of the positive urinalysis will require unnecessary cultures. Although the use of reflex will help eliminating the unnecessary culture, we have to remember that urinalysis and microscopy still lack the sensitivity and specificity to be used alone to diagnose urinary tract infection; urinalysis should not be the only marker for UTI, it should be used in conjunction with patients clinical diagnosis. The high positivity rate for UTI in LTCF adds to the complication of the reflex testing. More work needed to establish better parameters and algorithm to be used when screening patients for UTI using urinalysis.

Reviving Sternheimer stain: A single-center retrospective study to detect the diagnostic utility of urinary tract infections in the emergency department

Performance of the Sysmex UF-1000i Urine Analyser in the Rapid Diagnosis of Urinary Tract Infections in Hospitalized Patients.

Catalase Test and Gram Staining of Uncentrifuged Urine for the Diagnosis of Urinary Tract Infection: A Cross-sectional Study

A retrospective study of predictive value of Gram staining in the diagnosis of urinary tract infection

Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care Gram Stains in Obstructive Pyelonephritis Due to Ureteral Stones

Role of urine Gram stain in young febrile infants with a suspected urinary tract infection: a cohort study

Rapid discrimination of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria in liquid samples by using NaOH-sodium dodecyl sulfate solution and flow cytometry

Accuracy of the Sysmex UF-5000 analyzer for urinary tract infection screening and pathogen classification

A-287 Evaluation of Urinalysis Reflex to Culture in Long-Term Care Facilities: Is It Worth it?

Improving the diagnosis of urinary tract infections by the use of enriched media and a 48-hour incubation period

The value of urine sediment analyzer in screening white blood cells and bacteria for urinary tractinfection

Value of urine routine examination in diagnosis of urinary tract infections

Urine Flow Cytometry and Dipstick Analysis in Diagnosing Bacteriuria and Urinary Tract Infections among Adults in the Emergency Department—A Diagnostic Accuracy Trial

Preanalytical, Analytical and Postanalytical Analyses on Corynebacterium spp. and Actinomycetaceae in Urine Samples of Patients with Suspected Urinary Tract Infection—A Hypothesis-Forming Observational Study

Evaluation of Sysmex UF-500i Automated Urinary Sediment Analyzer in Screening Urinary Tract Infection

Evaluation of 3 different rapid automated systems for diagnosis of urinary tract infections

B-037 Comparison of Performance between Siemens Clinitek + Status Analyzer to ARKRAY AUTION MAX AX-4030 for Suspected Urinary Tract Infections

Cutoff values for bacteria and leukocytes for urine sediment analyzer FUS200 in culture-positive urinary-tract infections

Urinary calprotectin as a diagnostic tool for detecting significant bacteriuria

Lodestar DX, an evaluation: loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) for the diagnosis of urinary tract infection in symptomatic adult females

A novel approach to screening and managing the urinary tract infections suspected sample in the general human population