PMCCPMCCPMCC

Search tips
Search criteria 

Advanced

 
Logo of jcmPermissionsJournals.ASM.orgJournalJCM ArticleJournal InfoAuthorsReviewers
 
J Clin Microbiol. Jan 1994; 32(1): 40–45.
PMCID: PMC262966
Comparison of direct and standardized testing of infected urine for antimicrobial susceptibilities by disk diffusion.
A R Oakes, R Badger, and D I Grove
Department of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville, Australia.
Abstract
A total of 14,272 urine specimens were examined over one year to determine the validity of direct antimicrobial agent susceptibility testing against ampicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, cephalothin, gentamicin, norfloxacin, and trimethoprim. A comparison between direct and standardized disk diffusion tests was made for a total of 1,106 urine specimens containing > or = 10(5) organisms per ml in pure culture. There were 5,821 individual organism-antimicrobial agent challenges compared for the two testing methods, and there was complete agreement of susceptibility category in 5,492 comparisons (94.3%). Initially, discordant results were reduced from 5.7 to 2.1% when the intermediate category was considered susceptible. Intralaboratory variation was assessed by testing another 453 organisms by the standard National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) method on two consecutive days; there was complete agreement in 96.1% of comparisons. When results of direct and standardized testing were simply classified as susceptible or resistant, there was 1.1% discordance. When simple same-day tests were used together with predictable patterns of susceptibility and resistance, 536 (48.5%) of 1,106 isolates could be identified satisfactorily to the genus or species level. For laboratory reporting purposes, the direct method is equivalent to the standard method when the urine being tested is infected with > or = 10(5) organisms of a single type per ml. The presence or absence of preexisting antimicrobial agents in urine did not appreciably influence the results. This procedure allows the earlier reporting of susceptibility results and facilitates less expensive identification of many organisms. Costs and benefits need to be determined in each institution.
Full text
Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (1.0M), or click on a page image below to browse page by page.
Articles from Journal of Clinical Microbiology are provided here courtesy of
American Society for Microbiology (ASM)