Linked Life Data

3839653

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/3839653

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
9
pubmed:dateCreated
1985-9-26
pubmed:abstractText
Three urine preservation-transport methods were examined for their effect on rapid urine-screening procedures. Results from fresh urine specimens, screened for bacteriuria by leukocyte esterase, nitrate, Autobac, Bac-T-Screen, Auto Microbic System (AMS), and bioluminescence procedures, were compared with urine-screen results from urine specimens held for 24 hours at room temperature in chemical preservatives. Quantitative discrepancies ranged from 0%, for urine preserved with glycerin-boric acid-sodium formate and tested by AMS or leukocyte esterase, to 21% for urines in the same preservative tested by bioluminescence or nitrate. Up to 62% of the organism identifications made from preserved urine specimens tested by the AMS urine card were in error. These data suggest that it may be inadvisable to use weak organic acid-based urine preservation systems in conjunction with these urine-screen procedures.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
AIM
pubmed:chemical
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Sep
pubmed:issn
0003-9985
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
109
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
819-22
pubmed:dateRevised
2006-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1985
pubmed:articleTitle
Effect of urine preservation on urine screening and organism identification.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study