The use of the unstimulated nitroblue tetrazolium test as a routine screening test for bacterial infection in an adult population: a reassessment.

Abstract

A simplified version of the unstimulated nitroblue tetrazolium (NBT) test potentially adaptable for routine general hospital use was devised and employed to study 141 subjects in four population groups: healthy adults, patients with bacterial infection, patients with nonbacterial infection, and patients with noninfectious illness. There was no distinct segregation of patients with bacterial infections from patients with other disease processes. The NBT test failed to correlate with the underlying diagnosis in 27% of the subjects studied. The method of Park et al 16 was employed simultaneously in 45 subjects and the two methods were found to have comparable accuracy of discrimination. The NBT test was also compared with erythrocyte sedimentation rate, pyrexia, and neutrophilia as indices for discriminating bacterial infection from other disease and found to be the least discriminatory single test. The unstimulated NBT test may be somewhat useful as an adjunct to other indices in diagnosing bacterial infection, but it is not appropriate for the routine laboratories of acute general hospitals.