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

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a novel urine collection device (the 'Pee-in-Pot (PiP)') produces the same rates of reportable urine culture results as standard of care (SOC) urine collection. To determine whether the PiP produces comparable microscopy results to SOC urine collection. To estimate the carbon footprint of the PiP compared to SOC urine collection. DESIGN: A prospectively designed, single-centre, paired comparison study. SETTING: A district general hospital in Southwest England, including antenatal clinical, accident and emergency, medical and surgical ward environments. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 18 or over. INTERVENTIONS: Urine passed through the PiP device before being decanted into a 10 mL boric acid tube for microscopy and culture, compared with the same urine contained only in a sterile plastic vessel before being decanted into a boric acid tube for microscopy and culture. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: The proportion of positive urine culture results. SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of heavy mixed growth culture results. Comparison of particle counts: all small particles, bacteria, red blood cells and white blood cells. RESULTS: positive cultures). For microscopy, there was agreement in meeting culture thresholds for 1308 of 1353 paired samples with a difference in culturing rates of 0.00517 (95% CI -0.0045 to 0.015, ie, high level of agreement). The estimated base case carbon footprint of PiP testing was 95g CO2e compared to 270g CO2e for SOC testing. CONCLUSIONS: This study found the PiP to be non-inferior for routine urine microscopy and culture testing and to have a lower carbon footprint compared with SOC urine testing.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMJ Open
Published
2026-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2025-104988
Primary Topic
Urinary Tract Infections Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

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

Victoria Welsh, N. Burns-Cox, Christopher G. Ball, R. Porter et al.
BMJ Open
Urinary Tract Infections Management
article

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

Victoria Welsh, N. Burns-Cox, Christopher G. Ball, R. Porter, Andrew Mayne, Joseph John, Silifat Yusuf, Peter Harvey, Anna Vere, Benjamin Holdsworth, Nicola Lowe, Kazer Lynda, Valerie Yick, Na’el Clarke, Tracey Doolan, Andrew Walker, Steve Swann, Claire Butler
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a novel urine collection device (the 'Pee-in-Pot (PiP)') produces the same rates of reportable urine culture results as standard of care (SOC) urine collection. To determine whether the PiP produces comparable microscopy results to SOC urine collection. To estimate the carbon footprint of the PiP compared to SOC urine collection. DESIGN: A prospectively designed, single-centre, paired comparison study. SETTING: A district general hospital in Southwest England, including antenatal clinical, accident and emergency, medical and surgical ward environments. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 18 or over. INTERVENTIONS: Urine passed through the PiP device before being decanted into a 10 mL boric acid tube for microscopy and culture, compared with the same urine contained only in a sterile plastic vessel before being decanted into a boric acid tube for microscopy and culture. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: The proportion of positive urine culture results. SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of heavy mixed growth culture results. Comparison of particle counts: all small particles, bacteria, red blood cells and white blood cells. RESULTS: positive cultures). For microscopy, there was agreement in meeting culture thresholds for 1308 of 1353 paired samples with a difference in culturing rates of 0.00517 (95% CI -0.0045 to 0.015, ie, high level of agreement). The estimated base case carbon footprint of PiP testing was 95g CO2e compared to 270g CO2e for SOC testing. CONCLUSIONS: This study found the PiP to be non-inferior for routine urine microscopy and culture testing and to have a lower carbon footprint compared with SOC urine testing.

BMJ OpenVol. 16(4)
Southwest General Health Center (US), University of Exeter (GB), Royal Devon & Exeter NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Taunton & Somerset NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Somerset NHS Foundation Trust
Samsung Biomedical Research Institute
Openalex Percentile: Top 34%
Urinary Tract Infections Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.