TY - JOUR
T1 - Urine Reagent Strips Are Inaccurate for Assessing Hypohydration
T2 - A Brief Report
AU - Adams, J. D.
AU - Capitan-Jiménez, Catalina
AU - Huggins, Robert A.
AU - Casa, Douglas J.
AU - Mauromoustakos, Andy
AU - Kavouras, Stavros A.
PY - 2019/11/1
Y1 - 2019/11/1
N2 - OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic ability of urine reagent strips to identify hypohydration based on urine specific gravity (USG). DESIGN: This study examined the agreement of USG between strips and refractometry with Bland-Altman, whereas the diagnostic ability of the strips to assess hypohydration was performed by receiver operating characteristic analysis. SETTING: Arkansas high school football preseason practice. PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred fourteen fresh urine samples were analyzed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Urine specific gravity was assessed by both reagent strips and refractometry. Cutoffs of >1.020 and >1.025 were used for identifying hypohydration. RESULTS: Bland-Altman analysis showed agreement of the 2 methods. Overall diagnostic ability of the urine strip to identify hypohydration was fair (area under the curve 72%-78%). However, the sensitivity to correctly identify hypohydration was poor (63%-71%), and the specificity of correctly identifying euhydration was poor to fair (68%-83%). CONCLUSION: The urine strip method is not valid for assessing hypohydration.
AB - OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic ability of urine reagent strips to identify hypohydration based on urine specific gravity (USG). DESIGN: This study examined the agreement of USG between strips and refractometry with Bland-Altman, whereas the diagnostic ability of the strips to assess hypohydration was performed by receiver operating characteristic analysis. SETTING: Arkansas high school football preseason practice. PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred fourteen fresh urine samples were analyzed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Urine specific gravity was assessed by both reagent strips and refractometry. Cutoffs of >1.020 and >1.025 were used for identifying hypohydration. RESULTS: Bland-Altman analysis showed agreement of the 2 methods. Overall diagnostic ability of the urine strip to identify hypohydration was fair (area under the curve 72%-78%). However, the sensitivity to correctly identify hypohydration was poor (63%-71%), and the specificity of correctly identifying euhydration was poor to fair (68%-83%). CONCLUSION: The urine strip method is not valid for assessing hypohydration.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074544783&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074544783&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/JSM.0000000000000555
DO - 10.1097/JSM.0000000000000555
M3 - Article
C2 - 29708888
SN - 1050-642X
VL - 29
SP - 506
EP - 508
JO - Clinical journal of sport medicine : official journal of the Canadian Academy of Sport Medicine
JF - Clinical journal of sport medicine : official journal of the Canadian Academy of Sport Medicine
IS - 6
ER -