Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Topham, P. S
Right arrow Articles by Feehally, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Topham, P. S
Right arrow Articles by Feehally, J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Family Practice Vol. 21, No. 1, 18-21
© Oxford University Press 2004, all rights reserved.


Article

The value of urine screening in a young adult population

Peter S Tophama,, Ashok Jethwac, Maggie Watkinsc, Yvonne Reesb and John Feehallya

Departments of a Nephrology and b Radiology, Leicester General Hospital, and c Freemen's Common Health Centre, Leicester, UK

Correspondence to Dr Peter S Topham, Department of Nephrology, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester General Hospital, Gwendolen Road, Leicester LE5 4PW, UK; E-mail: Peter.Topham{at}uhl-tr.nhs.uk

Background. GPs in England and Wales are required to perform screening urinalysis on all newly registered patients. The value of this practice, however, is unclear.

Objective. The purpose of this study was to identify the prevalence of persistent urine abnormalities and to establish the added value of screening for both haematuria and proteinuria in a large cohort of young adults in the UK.

Methods. Urine screening was carried out in a cohort of young adults in a student health centre and a university hospital nephrology unit in a large British city. University students enrolling for health screening in a university health centre over a 2-year period were tested for haematuria and/or proteinuria by dipstick urinalysis. Subjects with persistent urine abnormalities were evaluated for the presence of significant renal tract pathology.

Results. Of 3808 students screened, 3570 provided an initial urine sample; 220 were abnormal. Of these, 38 (1% of original cohort) had persistent abnormalities (haematuria, 14; proteinuria, 16; both, eight). Subjects with isolated haematuria or proteinuria did not have significant pathology. In contrast, all the students with both haematuria and proteinuria had identifiable renal disease.

Conclusions. Our findings do not support the value of routine screening for proteinuria or haematuria in young adults. However, the combination of haematuria and proteinuria is a powerful predictor for parenchymal renal disease. Thus, if proteinuria is detected, further testing for haematuria should be performed.

Keywords. Glomerular disease, haematuria, proteinuria, screening, urinalysis.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
CJASNHome page
M. Ferris, S. L. Hogan, H. Chin, D. A. Shoham, D. S. Gipson, K. Gibson, S. Yilmaz, R. J. Falk, and J. C. Jennette
Obesity, Albuminuria, and Urinalysis Findings in US Young Adults from the Add Health Wave III Study
Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., November 1, 2007; 2(6): 1207 - 1214.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Clin. Pathol.Home page
W S Smellie, J O Forth, C A M McNulty, L Hirschowitz, D Lilic, R Gosling, D Bareford, E Logan, K G Kerr, G P Spickett, et al.
Best practice in primary care pathology: review 2
J. Clin. Pathol., February 1, 2006; 59(2): 113 - 120.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.