Microbiological Performance

Comparisons

Highlighted claims

• Positive urine culture rates were similar between Pee-in-Pot and standard sterile plastic control samples. — Clean pulp versus sterile plastic for mid-stream urine collection: a paired equivalence study comparing the microbiological performance of a novel low carbon collection device with the standard of care
• The Pee-in-Pot and control arms showed 98.5% overall matching for significant reportable positive cultures. — Clean pulp versus sterile plastic for mid-stream urine collection: a paired equivalence study comparing the microbiological performance of a novel low carbon collection device with the standard of care
• Microscopy threshold agreement between Pee-in-Pot and control samples was 97% overall. — Clean pulp versus sterile plastic for mid-stream urine collection: a paired equivalence study comparing the microbiological performance of a novel low carbon collection device with the standard of care
• There was no significant organism-specific difference in positive urine culture rates between the two testing arms. — Clean pulp versus sterile plastic for mid-stream urine collection: a paired equivalence study comparing the microbiological performance of a novel low carbon collection device with the standard of care
• Microscopy count differences showed a slight but statistically non-significant tendency toward higher counts in Pee-in-Pot samples. — Clean pulp versus sterile plastic for mid-stream urine collection: a paired equivalence study comparing the microbiological performance of a novel low carbon collection device with the standard of care