Which Urine Sampling Method is Suitable for Women Visiting the Emergency Department?

BACKGROUND: Urinalysis is a useful laboratory test in the diagnosis of various diseases. In sampling for the urinalysis, there is much concern about contamination that can lead to misdiagnosis in the mid-stream urine sampling method. We conducted this study to determine, in terms of concordance of results and contamination in culture, whether there was any superiority in mid-stream sampling methods with or without disinfection measures compared to the catheterization method. MATERIALS AND EMTHODS: We used three kinds of urine sampling methods sequentially, mid-stream non-clean catch, mid-stream clean catch, and catheterization, for ambulatory, non-pregnant, non-menstruating female patients who visited NHIC Ilsan Hospital emergency department during a one-week period in September 2001. Each sample was electrophotometrically analyzed for leukocyte esterase, nitrite, and blood by using a reagent strip and was cultured immediately or after overnight refrigeration. RESULTS: Of the 41 patients, 9 had culture-proven urinary tract infections. The concordance rates(kappa) for nitrite, blood, and leukocyte esterase were 0.875, 0.403, and 0.406 between non-clean catch and catheterized samples and 0.875, 0.481, and 0.560 between clean catch and catheterized samples, respectively. The contamination rate of the non-clean catch, the clean catch, and the catheterized samples were statistically different: 51.2%, 29.3% and 0%, respectively. CONCLUSION: We found that cleaning with disinfectant was effective for reducing the contamination rate, even though the best urine sampling method for zero contamination was catheterization. We recommend considering cost, patients' comfort, an acceptable threshold for contamination, and the necessity for a culture before choosing a urine sampling method for women who visit the emergency department.

The Patients With Headache in Emergency Department

BACKGROUND: Headache is a common complaint in patients presenting to the emergency department(ED). Many patients suffered sustained headache even after presenting to the ED. This study investigate whether the patients were received analgesics and timely adequate. METHOD: We analyzed 131 adolescent and adult patients with non-traumatic headache without any neurologic deficit in two emergency department during 6 months period retrospectively. RESULTS: The positive and negative predictive value according to primary impression were 47% and 74% respectively. The mean time to take brain computed tomography(CT) after ED presentation was 120 minutes. The patients with primary impression of intracranial hemorrhage(mainly SAH) were the most fast(mean time 88+/- 70 minutes). 28(21%) patients were received analgesics before taking brain CT(after ED presentation), and 70(53%) patients after CT, 27(54%) patients after cerebrospinal fluid examination. The mean time interval were 43, 126 and 149 minutes on each group being received the analgesics. CONCLUSION: According to this study many patients suffered sustained headache before being classified to certain type of disorder. It may due to the reasons that there were no definite guidelines treating headache, the pain itself, or the physician treats patients as physician's way.