1887

Abstract

Urine samples submitted for investigation of urinary tract infection (UTI) may identify more than one bacterial isolate. These samples may be reported as ‘mixed growth urine culture’ (MGUC). The clinical significance of MGUC remains controversial.

The impact of MGUC on patient management is not known and should be assessed.

To describe MGUC and assess its impact on patient management.

Microbiology laboratory reports (Leeds, UK) were retrospectively analysed and urine cultures reported as MGUC from a 1 week period underwent detailed laboratory analysis. Semi-structured interviews of NHS clinicians’ response to MGUC reports were explored for emergent themes.

In 2018, 12.4 % (14,323/115,664) of urine specimens processed to detect bacterial pathogens were reported as MGUC. Among a total of 200 MGUC samples identified within 1 week in 2019, detailed laboratory analysis identified 459 bacterial isolates. (30.1 %) and (27.5 %) were the most frequently isolated and the most frequent organism combination (24 %). In total, 65.5 % cultures contained two organisms and 82.5 % of all MGUC contained at least one . Interviews found clinicians believed MGUC reports represented detection of many commensal bacteria. Clinicians indicated they were more likely to diagnose and treat a UTI when provided with urine culture reports derived from detailed microbial analysis of MGUC, including identity and antibiotic sensitivity of organisms.

This study highlights the potential underuse of information derived from microbiological analysis of urine samples. Interpretive commentary on reports together with education for interpretation of enhanced reports should be explored further to improve outcomes in patients with UTI.

  • This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. This article was made open access via a Publish and Read agreement between the Microbiology Society and the corresponding author’s institution.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001544
2022-05-30
2024-06-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmm/71/5/jmm001544.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001544&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Croxall G, Weston V, Joseph S, Manning G, Cheetham P et al. Increased human pathogenic potential of Escherichia coli from polymicrobial urinary tract infections in comparison to isolates from monomicrobial culture samples. J Med Microbiol 2011; 60:102–109 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Siegman-Igra Y, Kulka T, Schwartz D, Konforti N et al. The significance of polymicrobial growth in urine: contamination or true infection. Scand J Infect Dis 1993; 25:85–91 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Darouiche RO, Priebe M, Clarridge JE. Limited vs full microbiological investigation for the management of symptomatic polymicrobial urinary tract infection in adult spinal cord-injured patients. Spinal Cord 1997; 35:534–539 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Kass EH. Asymptomatic infections of the urinary tract. 1956. J Urol 2002; 167:1016–1019 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bajpai T, Bhatambare G, Pandey M, Varma M et al. Mixed flora in the urine of hospitalized and elderly patients: Contamination or True infection?. Niger J Exp Clin Biosci 2014; 2:20 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Kline KA, Lewis AL. Gram-positive uropathogens, polymicrobial urinary tract infection, and the emerging microbiota of the urinary tract. Microbiol Spectr 2016; 4: [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. UK Health Security Agency Introduction to the preliminary identification of medically important bacteria and fungi from culture. UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations. ID 1 Issue 2; 2022 https://www.gov.uk/uk-standards-for-microbiology-investigations-smi-quality-and-consistency-in-clinical-laboratories
  8. Creswell JW. Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches, 3rd ed. Los Angeles, USA: SAGE publications; 2013
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Halcomb EJ, Davidson PM. Is verbatim transcription of interview data always necessary?. Appl Nurs Res 2006; 19:38–42 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Ritchie J, Spencer L. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In Bryman A, Burgess RG. eds Analyzing Qualitative Data London: Routledge; 1994 pp 173–194
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Khalifa MA, Abdoh AA, Silva FG, Flournoy DJ et al. Interpretation of multiple isolate urine cultures in adult male patients. J Natl Med Assoc 1995; 87:141–147 [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Commissioning for Quality and Innovation (CQUIN) Guidance for 2017-2019 National Health Service (NHS) England; 2019 https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/commissioning-for-qualityand-innovation-cquin-guidance-for-2017-2019/
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001544
Loading
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001544
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

PDF
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error