This audit helps healthcare professionals identify whether
laboratory requests for microscopy, culture and sensitivity
analysis of urine samples (urinalysis) were clinically
appropriate in adults with a suspected urinary tract infection
(UTI). Laboratory urinalysis is not required in most adults
with an uncomplicated lower UTI as it is unlikely to affect
UTIs are one of the most common reasons for antibiotic
prescribing in New Zealand. The lower urinary tract is most
often affected due to bacteria, usually from the gastrointestinal
tract, entering the urethra and proliferating in the bladder.
In many cases, the isolate causing an uncomplicated UTI is
highly predictable: 70 – 95% result from Escherichia coli infection, with other potential causative species including
Staphylococcus saprophyticus, Proteus spp., Klebsiella spp.
and Enterococcus spp. Complicated UTIs are also more
commonly caused by E. coli, however, the range of possible
causative species is much broader than for uncomplicated
infections. Although rare in the community, complicated UTIs
can occur as the result of fungal infection, which is generally
associated with Candida species, e.g. in people with an
Uncomplicated lower UTIs can be diagnosed with a high
level of confidence in females with a focused history of lower
urinary tract symptoms in the absence of complicating factors
or red flags. Subtle or atypical presentations are possible,
however, the combination of two or more “classic” features
of a UTI – without vaginal irritation or discharge in females –
generally indicates that a UTI is likely:2
- New onset dysuria
- Increased urinary frequency
- Increased urinary urgency
- Suprapubic abdominal pain
If there is uncertainty based on symptoms alone for any
reason, a urine dipstick analysis can be used to assess for
the nitrite and leukocyte esterase status. Positivity for either
category is usually sufficient to confirm a lower UTI. In most
cases, obtaining a midstream urine sample for laboratory
urinalysis (i.e. microscopy, culture and sensitivity testing) is
not recommended for most adults with an uncomplicated
UTI as the causative bacteria and antibiotic sensitivity profile
are predictable. Therefore, the initial antibiotic choice in
such cases should be empiric to avoid unnecessary use of
laboratory time and resources.
For further information on diagnosing and treating
lower UTIs in adults, see “Urinary tract infections (UTIs) – an
overview of lower UTI management in adults” - available in Best Practice e-Journal - Issue 3
Clinically appropriate reasons for requesting laboratory urinalysis in patients with a suspected UTI
Requesting laboratory urinalysis is only indicated if there
is suspicion of a UTI based on clinical symptoms in certain
circumstances. This includes:
- When dipstick testing is negative, but a UTI is still strongly suspected after investigating differential diagnoses
- People with recurrent UTIs, atypical symptoms or persistent symptoms despite antibiotic treatment
- People with suspected pyelonephritis, e.g. presence of significant flank pain or tenderness
- Females with complicating factors, e.g. pregnancy, catheterisation, urinary tract abnormalities, immunosuppression, renal impairment, diabetes
- Other high-risk groups, including males, children aged 14 years and under and people living in residential care facilities
This audit focuses on the appropriate requesting of laboratory urinalysis for adults with a suspected UTI.
Recommended audit standards
Ideally, all adults with a suspected UTI who have had laboratory urinalysis requested should have an appropriate clinical
justification documented. This may not be achieved on the first cycle of the audit but should be the aim for the second cycle.
Any patient aged ≥15 years who has had laboratory urinalysis requested following suspicion of a UTI based on clinical symptoms in the past 12 months.
N.B. Do not include asymptomatic urinalysis screening in pregnant females as this is routinely recommended.
You will need to have a system in place that allows you to identify eligible patients who have had laboratory urinalysis (i.e. microscopy,
culture and sensitivity testing) requested following suspicion of a UTI and audit their clinical notes. Many practices will be able to
identify patients by running a “query” through their PMS system.
It is likely that this audit will return a large number of eligible patients. If this is the case, select a random sample of 30 patients whose notes you will audit
Criteria for a positive result
A positive audit result is for an eligible patient to have a valid clinical reason documented for the laboratory urinalysis request. This includes:
- When dipstick testing is negative, but a UTI is still strongly suspected
- People with recurrent UTIs, atypical symptoms or persistent symptoms despite treatment
- People with suspected pyelonephritis
- Females with complicating factors
- Other high-risk groups, including males and people living in residential care facilities
Use the sheet provided to record your
data. A positive result is any patient with a suspected UTI where laboratory urinalysis was requested
and a valid clinical reason was documented in their notes. The
percentage achievement can be calculated by dividing the number of patients with a positive result
by the total number of patients.
The first step to improving medical practice is to identify the criteria where gaps exist between expected and actual performance and then to decide how to change practice.
Once a set of priorities for change have been decided on, an action plan should be developed to implement any changes.
It may be useful to consider the following points when developing a plan for action (RNZCGP 2002).
Problem solving process
- What is the problem or underlying problem(s)?
- Change it to an aim
- What are the solutions or options?
- What are the barriers?
- How can you overcome them?
Overcoming barriers to promote change
- Identifying barriers can provide a basis for change
- What is achievable – find out what the external pressures on the practice are and discuss ways of wdealing with them
in the practice setting
- Identify the barriers
- Develop a priority list
- Choose one or two achievable goals
- No single strategy or intervention is more effective than another, and sometimes a variety of methods are needed to
bring about lasting change
- Interventions should be directed at existing barriers or problems, knowledge, skills and attitudes, as well as performance
Monitoring change and progress
It is important to review the action plan developed previously at regular intervals. It may be helpful to review
the following questions:
- Is the process working?
- Are the goals for improvement being achieved?
- Are the goals still appropriate?
- Do you need to develop new tools to achieve the goals you have set?
Following the completion of the first cycle, it is recommended that practitioners complete the first part of the
activity summary sheet (Appendix 1).
Undertaking a second cycle
In addition to regular reviews of progress with the practice team, a second audit cycle should be completed in order to quantify progress on
closing the gaps in performance.
It is recommended that the second cycle be completed within 12 months of completing the first cycle. The second cycle
should begin at the data collection stage.
Following the completion of the second cycle it is recommended that practices complete the remainder of the
Audit of Medical Practice summary sheet.
Claiming credits for Te Whanake CPD programme requirements
Practice or clinical audits are useful tools for improving clinical practice and credits can be claimed towards the Patient Outcomes (Improving Patient Care and Health Outcomes) learning category of the Te Whanake CPD programme, on a credit per learning hour basis. A minimum of 12 credits is required in the Patient Outcomes category over a triennium (three years).
Any data driven activity that assesses the outcomes and quality of general practice work can be used to gain credits in the Patient Outcomes learning category. Under the refreshed Te Whanake CPD programme, audits are not compulsory and the RNZCGP also no longer requires that clinical audits are approved prior to use. The college recommends the PDSA format for developing and checking the relevance of a clinical audit.
To claim points go to the RNZCGP website: www.rnzcgp.org.nz
If a clinical audit is completed as part of Te Whanake requirements, the RNZCGP continues to encourage that evidence of participation in the audit be attached to your recorded activity. Evidence can include:
- A summary of the data collected
- An Audit of Medical Practice (CQI) Activity summary sheet (Appendix 1 in this audit or available on the
N.B. Audits can also be completed by other health professionals working in primary care (particularly prescribers), if relevant. Check with your accrediting authority as to documentation requirements.