比较尿蛋白-肌酐比值和尿液量筒检测法,以确定是否有明显蛋白尿的先兆子痫妇女。

IF 3.1 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Therapeutic advances in reproductive health Pub Date : 2024-10-09 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/26334941241288841
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":"比较尿蛋白-肌酐比值和尿液量筒检测法,以确定是否有明显蛋白尿的先兆子痫妇女。","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":"18 ","pages":"26334941241288841"},"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":"{\"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\":\"18 \",\"pages\":\"26334941241288841\"},\"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}","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

摘要

背景:评估妊娠期大量蛋白尿(SPIP)是诊断子痫前期的一个关键指标。然而,这种评估通常采用的初始方法--尿液浸量棒测试--往往会产生不准确的结果。虽然收集 24 小时的尿液被认为是最可靠的检测方法,但采用这种方法会导致诊断延误,从而可能影响孕妇和胎儿的健康。尿蛋白-肌酐(P/Cr)比值可作为 24 小时尿蛋白分析的替代方法,但其诊断准确性仍不确定。有必要比较尿蛋白/肌酐比值和浸量式尿液分析对 SPIP 的诊断准确性,尤其是在资源匮乏的环境中:以 24 小时尿蛋白排泄量为金标准,确定并比较尿液 P/Cr 比值和点滴尿液标本中沾取的尿液进行 SPIP 诊断的准确性:这是一项横断面比较研究:这项研究涉及 82 名从妊娠 20 周开始接受子痫前期评估的单胎孕妇,她们在同一尿样中接受了浸量尺和 P/Cr 比值检测。有先兆子痫风险的妇女在门诊时会得到一个用于收集尿样的标本容器。参与者接受了培训,并被告知应在下次产前预约前 24 小时采集尿样。然而,那些入院并被评估为子痫前期的患者则在医院收集其 24 小时尿液。结果测量包括两种检测方法的灵敏度、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值、似然比和准确性。明显蛋白尿的定义是 P/Cr 比值大于 0.27,或用浸量棒检测时蛋白尿量⩾2+。同时患有高血压和 SPIP 的妇女被确诊为子痫前期:参与者的平均年龄为 28.65±5.76 岁。相比之下,诊断准确率(91.46% (95% CI = 83.29-96.59) vs 59.76% (95% CI = 48.34-70.44), p = 0.001)、灵敏度(94.74% vs 70.00%, p = 0.021)、特异性(84.00% vs 43.75%, p = 0.001)、阴性预测值(87.50% vs 48.28%,p = 0.003)和阳性预测值(93.10% vs 66.04%,p = 0.001)分别高于点滴试验。此外,定点尿液 P/Cr 比值的阳性似然比和阴性似然比分别为(1.93 vs 1.24)和(0.07 vs 0.69):与广泛使用的量表测试相比,定点尿 P/Cr 在确定评估子痫前期的孕妇是否有明显蛋白尿方面具有更高的诊断准确性。在低收入环境中,需要进行更有力的多中心研究,以比较定点尿液 PCR 与标准 24 小时尿蛋白的诊断准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of urine protein-creatinine ratio and urine dipstick test for significant proteinuria in preeclamptic women.

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊最新文献
Prediction nomogram for antepartum hemorrhage in placenta previa women. Assessment of reproductive knowledge among young adults utilizing Amazon mechanical Turk survey. Relationship between chronic endometritis and fallopian tube obstruction and its influence on pregnancy outcome after fallopian tubal recanalization. Chlamydia trachomatis infections in Kenya - sexually transmitted and ocular infections: a scoping review. Digital knowledge translation tools for sexual and reproductive health information to adolescents: an evidence gap-map.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1