Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Advances in Therapy 10/2019

Open Access 01-10-2019 | Benign Prostatic Hypertrophy | Original Research

Is Dipstick Urinalysis Screening Beneficial in Men with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms?

Authors: Franklin C. Lowe, Martin C. Michel, Jan M. Wruck, Anna E. Verbeek

Published in: Advances in Therapy | Issue 10/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Dipstick urinalysis is a widely used screening tool in the evaluation of men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). As limited data support the use of dipstick urinalysis, we have used data from three recently published studies to assess clinical outcomes in those who had dipstick urinalysis findings for blood, glucose, and/or leukocytes.

Methods

We analyzed data from three observational studies involving men interested in using over-the-counter tamsulosin: a self-selection study (SSS) and two actual-use studies of 8-week (AUS8) and 24-week (AUS24) durations. Subgroup analyses focused on pooled data from participants not using α-blockers or other prescription medication for LUTS suggestive of BPH (nonRx users) and who had urine dipstick findings. Data from participants using α-blockers (AUS8) or any prescription BPH medications (SSS and AUS24) are presented as reference.

Results

Overall, 2488 nonRx users underwent dipstick urinalysis and 680 (27.3%) had positive findings including traces of blood (332; 13.3%), glucose (259; 10.4%), and/or leukocytes (245; 9.8%). Among users of prescription medicines, 21.6% (37/171) in SSS, 27.4% (23/84) in AUS8, and 31.1% (47/151) in AUS24 had urine dipstick findings. The 200 dipstick-positive nonRx users in SSS underwent per protocol urological assessment: 26 (13.0%) had a newly diagnosed condition causing/contributing to urinary symptoms of which 2.9% were identified as medically important conditions. Among nonRx users with or without a dipstick finding, medically important conditions reported included prostate cancer (1.0% vs. 1.0%, respectively) and urolithiasis (1.0% vs. 0.3%, respectively). The proportion of men with dipstick urinalysis findings was similar between men who regularly visited their physician and those who did not.

Conclusion

Dipstick urinalysis did not markedly increase the detection of undiagnosed medically important conditions that cause/contribute to urinary symptoms, suggesting that this test may not be a very effective screening tool for men with LUTS.

Funding

Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
3.
go back to reference Fourcade RO, Lacoin F, Roupret M, et al. Outcomes and general health-related quality of life among patients medically treated in general daily practice for lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. World J Urol. 2012;30:419–26.CrossRef Fourcade RO, Lacoin F, Roupret M, et al. Outcomes and general health-related quality of life among patients medically treated in general daily practice for lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. World J Urol. 2012;30:419–26.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Khasriya R, Khan S, Lunawat R, et al. The inadequacy of urinary dipstick and microscopy as surrogate markers of urinary tract infection in urological outpatients with lower urinary tract symptoms without acute frequency and dysuria. J Urol. 2010;183:1843–7.CrossRef Khasriya R, Khan S, Lunawat R, et al. The inadequacy of urinary dipstick and microscopy as surrogate markers of urinary tract infection in urological outpatients with lower urinary tract symptoms without acute frequency and dysuria. J Urol. 2010;183:1843–7.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Simerville JA, Maxted WC, Pahira JJ. Urinalysis: a comprehensive review. Am Fam Physician. 2005;71:1153–62.PubMed Simerville JA, Maxted WC, Pahira JJ. Urinalysis: a comprehensive review. Am Fam Physician. 2005;71:1153–62.PubMed
6.
go back to reference Pallin DJ, Ronan C, Montazeri K, et al. Urinalysis in acute care of adults: pitfalls in testing and interpreting results. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2014;1(1):ofu019.CrossRef Pallin DJ, Ronan C, Montazeri K, et al. Urinalysis in acute care of adults: pitfalls in testing and interpreting results. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2014;1(1):ofu019.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Deville WL, Yzermans JC, van Duijn NP, et al. The urine dipstick test useful to rule out infections. A meta-analysis of the accuracy. BMC Urol. 2004;4:4.CrossRef Deville WL, Yzermans JC, van Duijn NP, et al. The urine dipstick test useful to rule out infections. A meta-analysis of the accuracy. BMC Urol. 2004;4:4.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Davis R, Jones JS, Barocas DA, et al. Diagnosis, evaluation and follow-up of asymptomatic microhematuria (AMH) in adults: AUA guideline. J Urol. 2012;188:2473–81.CrossRef Davis R, Jones JS, Barocas DA, et al. Diagnosis, evaluation and follow-up of asymptomatic microhematuria (AMH) in adults: AUA guideline. J Urol. 2012;188:2473–81.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Roehrborn CG, Lowe FC, Gittelman M, et al. Management of male lower urinary tract symptoms in a simulated over-the-counter setting: an exploratory, study of tamsulosin. Drugs Aging. 2019;36:179–88.CrossRef Roehrborn CG, Lowe FC, Gittelman M, et al. Management of male lower urinary tract symptoms in a simulated over-the-counter setting: an exploratory, study of tamsulosin. Drugs Aging. 2019;36:179–88.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Roehrborn CG, Lowe FC, Gittelman M, et al. Feasibility of an alternative option for the management of male lower urinary tract symptoms. J Urol. 2016;195:125–30.CrossRef Roehrborn CG, Lowe FC, Gittelman M, et al. Feasibility of an alternative option for the management of male lower urinary tract symptoms. J Urol. 2016;195:125–30.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Roehrborn CG, Lowe FC, Gittelman M, et al. Simulated over-the-counter use of tamsulosin by men with urinary symptoms. J Sex Med. 2018;15:S1.CrossRef Roehrborn CG, Lowe FC, Gittelman M, et al. Simulated over-the-counter use of tamsulosin by men with urinary symptoms. J Sex Med. 2018;15:S1.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Kang M, Lee S, Jeong SJ, et al. Characteristics and significant predictors of detecting underlying diseases in adults with asymptomatic microscopic hematuria: a large case series of a Korean population. Int J Urol. 2015;22:389–93.CrossRef Kang M, Lee S, Jeong SJ, et al. Characteristics and significant predictors of detecting underlying diseases in adults with asymptomatic microscopic hematuria: a large case series of a Korean population. Int J Urol. 2015;22:389–93.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Madeb R, Golijanin D, Knopf J, et al. Long-term outcome of patients with a negative work-up for asymptomatic microhematuria. Urology. 2010;75:20–5.CrossRef Madeb R, Golijanin D, Knopf J, et al. Long-term outcome of patients with a negative work-up for asymptomatic microhematuria. Urology. 2010;75:20–5.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Mishriki SF, Nabi G, Cohen NP. Diagnosis of urologic malignancies in patients with asymptomatic dipstick hematuria: prospective study with 13 years’ follow-up. Urology. 2008;71:13–6.CrossRef Mishriki SF, Nabi G, Cohen NP. Diagnosis of urologic malignancies in patients with asymptomatic dipstick hematuria: prospective study with 13 years’ follow-up. Urology. 2008;71:13–6.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Rao PK, Jones JS. How to evaluate ‘dipstick hematuria’: what to do before you refer. Cleve Clin J Med. 2008;75:227–33.CrossRef Rao PK, Jones JS. How to evaluate ‘dipstick hematuria’: what to do before you refer. Cleve Clin J Med. 2008;75:227–33.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Rao PK, Gao T, Pohl M, et al. Dipstick pseudohematuria: unnecessary consultation and evaluation. J Urol. 2010;183:560–4.CrossRef Rao PK, Gao T, Pohl M, et al. Dipstick pseudohematuria: unnecessary consultation and evaluation. J Urol. 2010;183:560–4.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Samal L, Linder JA. The primary care perspective on routine urine dipstick screening to identify patients with albuminuria. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013;8:131–5.CrossRef Samal L, Linder JA. The primary care perspective on routine urine dipstick screening to identify patients with albuminuria. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013;8:131–5.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Bandari J, Jacobs B, Smith K. Evaluating the cost effectiveness of the asymptomatic microhematuria guidelines. J Urol. 2017;197:e281.CrossRef Bandari J, Jacobs B, Smith K. Evaluating the cost effectiveness of the asymptomatic microhematuria guidelines. J Urol. 2017;197:e281.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Halpern J, Chughtai B. Cost-effectiveness of common diagnostic approaches for evaluation of asymptomatic microscopic hematuria. J Urol. 2017;197:e280.CrossRef Halpern J, Chughtai B. Cost-effectiveness of common diagnostic approaches for evaluation of asymptomatic microscopic hematuria. J Urol. 2017;197:e280.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Loo R, Whittaker J, Rabrenivich V. National practice recommendations for hematuria: how to evaluate in the absence of strong evidence? Perm J. 2009;13:37–46.CrossRef Loo R, Whittaker J, Rabrenivich V. National practice recommendations for hematuria: how to evaluate in the absence of strong evidence? Perm J. 2009;13:37–46.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Is Dipstick Urinalysis Screening Beneficial in Men with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms?
Authors
Franklin C. Lowe
Martin C. Michel
Jan M. Wruck
Anna E. Verbeek
Publication date
01-10-2019
Publisher
Springer Healthcare
Published in
Advances in Therapy / Issue 10/2019
Print ISSN: 0741-238X
Electronic ISSN: 1865-8652
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-019-01042-0

Other articles of this Issue 10/2019

Advances in Therapy 10/2019 Go to the issue