Europe PMC

This website requires cookies, and the limited processing of your personal data in order to function. By using the site you are agreeing to this as outlined in our privacy notice and cookie policy.

Abstract 


A series of 391 unselected expectorated sputum specimens was examined microscopically, and six different published criteria for judging the acceptability of the specimens were applied. Of the 391 specimens, 234 were found to be acceptable or unacceptable by all six criteria; 157 specimens were discrepant. By the criteria of Murray and Washington and of Barry, 25 and 23% of the specimens, respectively, were rejected; only 19 of 143 specimens which contained potential pathogens as part of their predominant microbial flora were rejected by both sets of criteria. The criteria described by Geckler et al. and Bartlett missed fewer potential pathogens; only 9 or 17% of the specimens, respectively, were found unacceptable. The criteria of Heineman and Radano and of Van Scoy resulted in the greatest percentages of specimens judged unacceptable (28 and 29%, respectively), including 19 and 24% of specimens containing potential pathogens. The reproducibility of sputum screening results was also assessed, comparing the method of Murray and Washington with that of Barry. Six separate slides were prepared from each of 45 different specimens: three samples with purulent or bloody flecks and three samples in which the specimens had been mixed with an applicator swab. Satisfactory reproducibility was observed with both criteria and both sampling methods; no significant differences in reproducibility could be documented in this limited series.

Free full text 


Logo of jcmLink to Publisher's site
J Clin Microbiol. 1982 Oct; 16(4): 627–631.
PMCID: PMC272434
PMID: 7153311

Comparison of six different criteria for judging the acceptability of sputum specimens.

Abstract

A series of 391 unselected expectorated sputum specimens was examined microscopically, and six different published criteria for judging the acceptability of the specimens were applied. Of the 391 specimens, 234 were found to be acceptable or unacceptable by all six criteria; 157 specimens were discrepant. By the criteria of Murray and Washington and of Barry, 25 and 23% of the specimens, respectively, were rejected; only 19 of 143 specimens which contained potential pathogens as part of their predominant microbial flora were rejected by both sets of criteria. The criteria described by Geckler et al. and Bartlett missed fewer potential pathogens; only 9 or 17% of the specimens, respectively, were found unacceptable. The criteria of Heineman and Radano and of Van Scoy resulted in the greatest percentages of specimens judged unacceptable (28 and 29%, respectively), including 19 and 24% of specimens containing potential pathogens. The reproducibility of sputum screening results was also assessed, comparing the method of Murray and Washington with that of Barry. Six separate slides were prepared from each of 45 different specimens: three samples with purulent or bloody flecks and three samples in which the specimens had been mixed with an applicator swab. Satisfactory reproducibility was observed with both criteria and both sampling methods; no significant differences in reproducibility could be documented in this limited series.

Full text

Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (785K), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Geckler RW, Gremillion DH, McAllister CK, Ellenbogen C. Microscopic and bacteriological comparison of paired sputa and transtracheal aspirates. J Clin Microbiol. 1977 Oct;6(4):396–399. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Heineman HS, Chawla JK, Lopton WM. Misinformation from sputum cultures without microscopic examination. J Clin Microbiol. 1977 Nov;6(5):518–527. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Heineman HS, Radano RR. Acceptability and cost savings of selective sputum microbiology in a community teaching hospital. J Clin Microbiol. 1979 Oct;10(4):567–573. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Murray PR, Washington JA. Microscopic and baceriologic analysis of expectorated sputum. Mayo Clin Proc. 1975 Jun;50(6):339–344. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Van Scoy RE. Bacterial sputum cultures. A clinician's viewpoint. Mayo Clin Proc. 1977 Jan;52(1):39–41. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Clinical Microbiology are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

Citations & impact 


Impact metrics

Jump to Citations

Citations of article over time

Smart citations by scite.ai
Smart citations by scite.ai include citation statements extracted from the full text of the citing article. The number of the statements may be higher than the number of citations provided by EuropePMC if one paper cites another multiple times or lower if scite has not yet processed some of the citing articles.
Explore citation contexts and check if this article has been supported or disputed.
https://scite.ai/reports/10.1128/jcm.16.4.627-631.1982

Supporting
Mentioning
Contrasting
0
36
0

Article citations


Go to all (34) article citations

Similar Articles 


To arrive at the top five similar articles we use a word-weighted algorithm to compare words from the Title and Abstract of each citation.