What do general practitioners do when patients present with symptoms indicative of urinary tract infections?

New Zealand Medical Journal

Volumn 111, Issue 1066, 1998, Pages 189-191

  McLeod, Deborah ^a   Kljakovic, M ^a,b  

^a Department of Medicine   (United States)

^b Wellington Faculty

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIBIOTIC THERAPY; ARTICLE; DYSURIA; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; MICTURITION DISORDER; SYMPTOMATOLOGY; URINALYSIS; URINARY TRACT INFECTION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANTI-BACTERIAL AGENTS; CHILD; FAMILY PRACTICE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS;

EID: 0032557381     PISSN: 00288446     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (7)

1. Bonnardeau A, Sommervill P, Kaye M. A study on the reliability of dipstick urinalysis. Clin Nephrol 1994; 41: 167-72.
2. Winkens RA, Leffers P, Trienekens T, Stobberingh E. The validity of urine examination for urinary tract infections in daily practice. Fam Pract 1995; 11: 290-3.
3. Holland D, Bliss KJ, Allen CD, Gilbert GL. A comparison of chemical dipsticks read visually or by photometry in the routine screening of urine specimens in the clinical microbiology laboratory. Pathology 1995; 27: 91-6.
4. National Preferred Medicines Centre, Case Study No 30. 1996.
5. Dowell AC, Britton JP. Microhaematuria in general practice: is urine microscopy misleading? Br J Gen Pract 1990, 40: 67-8.
6. Medicines Information Bulletin National Preferred Medicines Centre; 1997.
7. Hiscoke C, Yoxall H, Greig D, Lightfoot NF. Validation of a method for the rapid diagnosis of urinary tract infection suitable for use in general practice. Br J Gen Pract 1990; 40: 403-5.