Evidence Hub

Quick-Wee Versus Bladder Stimulation to Collect Midstream Urine From Pre-continent Infants: a Randomized Controlled Trial

ClinicalTrials.gov · COMPLETED, 2022

230 participants

Abstract

Urinary tract infections are common in infants. Obtaining urine from pre-continent children can be difficult and time consuming. The method of collection must balance reliability, speed, low rate of contamination, and invasiveness.

According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, midstream clean-catch urine is an acceptable method to diagnose urinary tract infections. However, it is impractical in pre-continent children.

Recently, two quick, safe and effective methods have been reported in the literature:

* The Quick-wee method: it consists in stimulating the suprapubic area with a cold and wet compress to obtain urines.

* The bladder stimulation method : the child is held under the armpits with legs dangling and a physician taps the suprapubic area and massages lumbar area alternatively.

However, advanced age, high weight, and level of discomfort during bladder stimulation were significantly associated with failure to obtain urines.

Conditions: Urinary Tract Infections.

Primary outcome: volume of urine collection to measure the effectiveness of two techniques.

Enrollment: 230 participants.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 230 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free