Real World Evidence
Guidance® UTI testing is associated with reductions in critical adverse outcomes, healthcare resource utilization and cost for complicated UTI.
Study size: for standard urine culture (N=678) or Guidance® UTI (N=69)
lower rate of outpatient emergency visits
lower inpatient admissions rate
urosepsis, urgent care and skilled nursing facility admissions for every 1,000 patients in this study
savings per cUTI patient tested with Guidance UTI (p=0.043)
reduction in visits to emergency department, inpatient hospital, urgent care and SNF
for 25,000 cUTI cases
COST FOR HEALTHCARE SYSTEM
UTIs are responsible for 10.5 million office visits per year3 and 3.1 million ER visits per year4
UTIs are the 4th leading cause of hospitalization for Medicare patients with 200,000 hospitalizations annually5
COST FOR PATIENT OUTCOMES
Up to 1/3 of infections illustrate resistance to an antibiotic6
According to the CDC, antibiotic resistance gives rise to at least 2 million infections and 23,000 deaths/year7
Traditional urine culture misses up to 22% of all UTI-positive patients.1
Guidance® UTI detected 43% more organisms than culture3, covering the most relevant causes of UTIs for a more accurate diagnosis.
Genotype testing alone only reports on the genetic potential to develop resistance to antibiotics, which may not be enough information to guide effective treatment.
Guidance® UTI is the only test that goes beyond genotype testing by including patented Pooled Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing (P-AST™). P-AST™ accounts for bacterial interactions in polymicrobial infections that may alter antibiotic resistance.
Delayed personalized treatment happens consistently with traditional culture methods taking up to three days or more to return results.
Guidance UTI® delivers results in less than one day of a sample reaching the lab, for fast, personalized treatment that advances patient outcomes and antibiotic stewardship.
1. Daly A, Baunoch D, Rehling K, Luke N, Campbell M, et al. (2020). Utilization of M-PCR and P-AST for Diagnosis and Management of Urinary
Tract Infections in Home-Based Primary Care. JOJ Urology & Nephrology, 7(2), 555707. DOI: 0.19080/JOJUN.2020.07.555707
2. Turner RM, Wu B, Lawrence K, Hackett J, Karve S, et al. (2015). Assessment of Outpatient and Inpatient Antibiotic Treatment Patterns and
Health Care Costs of Patients with Complicated Urinary Tract Infections. Clinical Therapeutics 37(9): 2037-2047
3. Vollstedt A, Baunoch D, Wojno KJ, Luke N, Cline K, et al. (2020). Multisite Prospective Comparison of Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction
Testing with Urine Culture for Diagnosis of Urinary Tract Infections in Symptomatic Patients. J Sur urology, JSU-102. DOI: 10.29011/ JSU- 102.100002
4. CDC-National Center for Health Statistics, 2017
5. Data.CMS.gov National Summary of Inpatient Charge Data by Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Group (MS-DRG), FY2017 [Internet]. Baltimore (MD): Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services; [cited 2020 April 28]. Available from: https://data.cms.gov/Medicare-Inpatient/National-Summary-of-Inpatient-Charge-Data-by-medic-/ijhk-r7bw/data
6. Schmiemann G, et al. Resistance profiles of urinary tract infections in general practice – an observational study. BMC Urol. 2012;12:33.
7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Antibiotic Resistance Threats in the United States, 2013. 2013 [cited 2020 April 28]. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/drugresistance/threat-report-2013-508.pdf
8. Daly A, Baunoch D, Rehling K, Luke N, Campbell M, et al. Utilization of M-PCR and P-AST for Diagnosis and Management of Urinary Tract Infections in Home-Based Primary Care. JOJ Urology & Nephrology. 2020;7(2):555707. doi: 10.19080/JOJUN.2020.07.555707