Chinedu L Olisa, Betrand O Nwosu, George U Eleje, Charlotte B Oguejiofor, Innocent I Mbachu, Chukwudi A Ogabido, Tobechi K Njoku, Chidinma C Okafor, Zebulon C Okechukwu, Chukwunwendu F Okeke, Ifeanyi O Okonkwo, Emmanuel I Okaforcha, Chukwunonso I Enechukwu, Chito P Ilika, Obinna K Nnabuchi, Ugochukwu H Osuafor, Harrison C Ugwuoroko, Emmanuel C Egwuatu, Martin C Andeh, Chigozie G Okafor
{"title":"Comparison of urine protein-creatinine ratio and urine dipstick test for significant proteinuria in preeclamptic women.","authors":"Chinedu L Olisa, Betrand O Nwosu, George U Eleje, Charlotte B Oguejiofor, Innocent I Mbachu, Chukwudi A Ogabido, Tobechi K Njoku, Chidinma C Okafor, Zebulon C Okechukwu, Chukwunwendu F Okeke, Ifeanyi O Okonkwo, Emmanuel I Okaforcha, Chukwunonso I Enechukwu, Chito P Ilika, Obinna K Nnabuchi, Ugochukwu H Osuafor, Harrison C Ugwuoroko, Emmanuel C Egwuatu, Martin C Andeh, Chigozie G Okafor","doi":"10.1177/26334941241288841","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Assessing for significant proteinuria in pregnancy (SPIP) stands as a key indicator for diagnosing preeclampsia. However, the initial method typically employed for this assessment, the urine dipstick test, often yields inaccurate results. While a 24-h urine collection is considered the most reliable test, its implementation can lead to delays in diagnosis, potentially affecting both maternal and fetal well-being. The urine protein-creatinine (P/Cr) ratio can be used as an alternative to 24-h urine protein analysis, but its diagnostic accuracy has remained uncertain. There is a need to compare the diagnostic accuracy of urine P/Cr ratio and dipstick urinalysis for SPIP, especially in resource-poor settings.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine and compare the diagnostic accuracy of urine P/Cr ratio and dipstick urinalysis in a spot urine specimen for the diagnosis of SPIP among women evaluated for preeclampsia using 24-h urine protein excretions as a gold standard.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This is a comparative cross-sectional study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study involved 82 singleton pregnant women evaluated for preeclampsia from 20 weeks of gestation who underwent dipstick and P/Cr ratio tests in the same urine sample. Women at risk of preeclampsia were given a specimen container for the collection of urine samples on an outpatient basis. Participants were trained and told to collect the urine sample 24 h prior to their next antenatal appointment. However, those on admission and evaluated for preeclampsia had their 24-h urine collected in the hospital. The outcome measures included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, likelihood ratio and accuracy for the two tests. Significant proteinuria was defined as a P/Cr ratio >0.27 or ⩾2+ of proteinuria on the dipstick test. Preeclampsia was confirmed in women with both high blood pressure and SPIP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age of participants was 28.65 ± 5.76 years. Comparatively, the diagnostic accuracy (91.46% (95% CI = 83.29-96.59) vs 59.76% (95% CI = 48.34-70.44), <i>p</i> = 0.001), sensitivity (94.74% vs 70.00%, <i>p</i> = 0.021), specificity (84.00% vs 43.75%, <i>p</i> = 0.001), negative predictive value (87.50% vs 48.28%, <i>p</i> = 0.003) and positive predictive value (93.10% vs 66.04%, <i>p</i> = 0.001), respectively, were higher for the spot urine P/Cr ratio than dipstick test. In addition, the positive likelihood ratio and the negative likelihood ratio for spot urine P/Cr ratio versus dipstick test were (1.93 vs 1.24) and (0.07 vs 0.69), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The spot urine P/Cr has superior diagnostic accuracy in the determination of significant proteinuria in pregnant women being evaluated for preeclampsia than the widely used dipstick test. A more robust multicenter study is needed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of spot urine PCR with the standard 24-h urine protein in low-income settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":75219,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic advances in reproductive health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11467826/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic advances in reproductive health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26334941241288841","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Assessing for significant proteinuria in pregnancy (SPIP) stands as a key indicator for diagnosing preeclampsia. However, the initial method typically employed for this assessment, the urine dipstick test, often yields inaccurate results. While a 24-h urine collection is considered the most reliable test, its implementation can lead to delays in diagnosis, potentially affecting both maternal and fetal well-being. The urine protein-creatinine (P/Cr) ratio can be used as an alternative to 24-h urine protein analysis, but its diagnostic accuracy has remained uncertain. There is a need to compare the diagnostic accuracy of urine P/Cr ratio and dipstick urinalysis for SPIP, especially in resource-poor settings.
Objectives: To determine and compare the diagnostic accuracy of urine P/Cr ratio and dipstick urinalysis in a spot urine specimen for the diagnosis of SPIP among women evaluated for preeclampsia using 24-h urine protein excretions as a gold standard.
Design: This is a comparative cross-sectional study.
Methods: The study involved 82 singleton pregnant women evaluated for preeclampsia from 20 weeks of gestation who underwent dipstick and P/Cr ratio tests in the same urine sample. Women at risk of preeclampsia were given a specimen container for the collection of urine samples on an outpatient basis. Participants were trained and told to collect the urine sample 24 h prior to their next antenatal appointment. However, those on admission and evaluated for preeclampsia had their 24-h urine collected in the hospital. The outcome measures included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, likelihood ratio and accuracy for the two tests. Significant proteinuria was defined as a P/Cr ratio >0.27 or ⩾2+ of proteinuria on the dipstick test. Preeclampsia was confirmed in women with both high blood pressure and SPIP.
Results: The mean age of participants was 28.65 ± 5.76 years. Comparatively, the diagnostic accuracy (91.46% (95% CI = 83.29-96.59) vs 59.76% (95% CI = 48.34-70.44), p = 0.001), sensitivity (94.74% vs 70.00%, p = 0.021), specificity (84.00% vs 43.75%, p = 0.001), negative predictive value (87.50% vs 48.28%, p = 0.003) and positive predictive value (93.10% vs 66.04%, p = 0.001), respectively, were higher for the spot urine P/Cr ratio than dipstick test. In addition, the positive likelihood ratio and the negative likelihood ratio for spot urine P/Cr ratio versus dipstick test were (1.93 vs 1.24) and (0.07 vs 0.69), respectively.
Conclusion: The spot urine P/Cr has superior diagnostic accuracy in the determination of significant proteinuria in pregnant women being evaluated for preeclampsia than the widely used dipstick test. A more robust multicenter study is needed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of spot urine PCR with the standard 24-h urine protein in low-income settings.