Nephrology · Clinical Calculator · Urolithiasis

Ureteral Stone Passage Likelihood — STONE Score

Enter five clinical variables to estimate the probability that acute flank pain is caused by an uncomplicated ureteral stone. Based on the validated Moore et al. 2014 STONE score (BMJ).

Published: References: 3 Read time:

← All calculators & tools  ·  Full kidney stones guide →

Instructions
  1. Obtain a brief history: ask about the patient's sex, when the pain started, and whether nausea or vomiting is present.
  2. Perform a dipstick or microscopic urinalysis and determine whether erythrocytes (blood) are present or absent.
  3. Select the appropriate option for each of the five variables in the calculator above. Results update automatically — no submit button is needed.
  4. Interpret the probability category (Low / Moderate / High) in the context of the full clinical picture. A low score should broaden the differential; a high score supports pursuing imaging promptly while keeping serious alternative diagnoses in mind.
  5. Always arrange physician assessment. The STONE score is a decision-support aid, not a replacement for clinical judgment or imaging.

All computation runs in your browser; no patient data is stored or transmitted.

When to Use

Use the STONE score when evaluating an adult patient presenting to the emergency department or clinic with acute flank pain in whom an uncomplicated ureteral stone is part of the differential diagnosis. The score stratifies patients into low, moderate, and high probability groups to guide the use of diagnostic imaging and downstream management.

Appropriate use

Adult patients presenting with acute unilateral flank pain, where ureteral stone is suspected. The score is most valuable in settings where immediate CT imaging is not available or where pre-test risk stratification is needed to decide between ultrasound-first and CT-first pathways. A high score can support presumptive management while imaging is arranged; a low score should increase suspicion for alternative diagnoses.

⚠️

When NOT to rely on it

Do not use the STONE score in isolation when red-flag features are present: fever (suggests infected stone), known solitary kidney, haemodynamic instability, or clinical suspicion for abdominal aortic aneurysm. The score was derived and validated in adults presenting to emergency departments in the United States; its performance in paediatric patients and in settings with very different stone prevalence may differ. A low score does not exclude a stone, and a high score does not confirm one — imaging and physician judgment remain essential.

Pearls & Pitfalls
💡

A high score supports stone — but don't stop there

Even a STONE score of 10–13 (high probability, ~88–89% stone likelihood) means roughly 1 in 10 patients does not have a stone. Always consider serious alternative diagnoses, particularly abdominal aortic aneurysm in older patients with vascular risk factors and atypical pain characteristics. A high score supports prompt imaging; it does not replace it.

🔬

Urinalysis timing matters

Microscopic hematuria is absent in up to 15–30% of patients with a confirmed ureteral stone. Collect the urine early in the visit, before IV fluids are given, to maximise sensitivity. A negative dipstick does not exclude a stone — it simply scores zero for the erythrocytes variable, shifting the total toward a lower risk band.

🚫

Seek emergency care immediately for these features

Fever or rigors, a single functioning kidney, uncontrolled pain despite analgesia, persistent vomiting preventing oral hydration, or reduced urine output all indicate a potentially obstructed or infected stone — a urological emergency. Do not wait for imaging results before initiating urgent assessment. These features are exclusions from routine outpatient stone management regardless of the STONE score.

Why Use It

Acute flank pain is one of the most common emergency department presentations, yet the diagnosis of ureteral stone is not always straightforward. CT urography is the gold-standard imaging modality but exposes patients to ionizing radiation, incurs cost, and may not be immediately available in all Philippine settings. Ultrasound has lower sensitivity but avoids radiation and is widely accessible.

The STONE score (Sex, Timing, Origin, Nausea/vomiting, Erythrocytes) was derived and validated by Moore et al. in a multicenter US emergency department cohort (BMJ 2014). In the validation cohort, a score of 0–5 (low) corresponded to approximately 9–10% stone likelihood, score 6–9 (moderate) to approximately 51%, and score 10–13 (high) to approximately 88–89%. By quantifying pre-imaging probability, the score helps clinicians decide which patients can safely proceed with ultrasound-first protocols versus those who benefit from immediate CT, and which low-probability patients need thorough evaluation for serious alternative causes of flank pain such as aortic aneurysm, pyelonephritis, or gynaecologic pathology.

In the Philippine context, where radiation exposure, cost, and after-hours CT availability are genuine constraints, a validated pre-test probability tool adds practical value at the point of care.

STONE Score — Ureteral Stone Likelihood Calculator

Select the five clinical variables below. The score and probability category update automatically.

Male sex carries a higher likelihood of ureteral stone.
Shorter, more acute pain onset scores higher.
Retained for fidelity to the validated 2014 STONE score. Defaulted to Non-Black for the Philippine population; adjust if it does not apply.
Reflects the autonomic response to ureteral colic.
Microscopic or dipstick hematuria on urinalysis.
Total STONE Score
0–13
Probability Category
Low / Moderate / High
Approx. Stone Likelihood
Validation cohort

⚕ Based on Moore CL, et al. Derivation and validation of a clinical prediction rule for uncomplicated ureteral stone — the STONE score. BMJ 2014;348:g2191. Score range 0–13. Low: 0–5 (~9–10% stone likelihood). Moderate: 6–9 (~51%). High: 10–13 (~88–89%). A low score does not exclude a stone; a high score does not confirm one or rule out serious alternative causes of flank pain. Always be evaluated by a physician.

Next Steps

Use the result to support — not replace — clinical judgment.

  • Interpret the value against the targets shown in the calculator and the Evidence section below, in the context of the full clinical picture.
  • Trend serial measurements rather than acting on a single result; confirm abnormal or unexpected values before changing management.
  • Apply the relevant KDIGO / specialty-guideline threshold and document the indication.
  • Escalate or refer to nephrology when results are out of range, rapidly changing, or discordant with the clinical picture — and discuss the implications with the patient.
Evidence & References

Formula & Equations

VariableFindingPoints
SexMale+2
SexFemale0
Timing (duration of pain)Less than 6 hours+3
Timing (duration of pain)6 to 24 hours+1
Timing (duration of pain)More than 24 hours0
Origin (race/ethnicity)Non-Black+3
Origin (race/ethnicity)Black0
Nausea / vomitingVomiting+2
Nausea / vomitingNausea alone+1
Nausea / vomitingNone0
Erythrocytes (urinalysis)Present+3
Erythrocytes (urinalysis)Absent0

Risk Bands

CategoryScore RangeApproximate Stone Likelihood
Low0–5~9–10%
Moderate6–9~51%
High10–13~88–89%

Maximum possible score: 13 (Male +2, timing <6 h +3, non-Black +3, vomiting +2, hematuria present +3). Likelihood estimates are from the validation cohort (Moore et al. 2014, BMJ); actual prevalence may vary by setting and population.

Evidence & References

The STONE score was derived and validated by Moore et al. in a prospective multicenter emergency department study published in the BMJ in 2014. The acronym stands for Sex, Timing, Origin, Nausea/vomiting, and Erythrocytes. The score demonstrated good discrimination (AUC ~0.86) between patients with and without confirmed ureteral stones on CT urography. Subsequent studies have examined stone size and spontaneous passage rates (Coll et al.), and the EAU Urolithiasis Guidelines provide the current international framework for stone management including imaging decision pathways.

  1. Moore CL, Bomann S, Daniels B, et al. Derivation and validation of a clinical prediction rule for uncomplicated ureteral stone — the STONE score: retrospective and prospective observational cohort studies. BMJ. 2014;348:g2191.
  2. Coll DM, Varanelli MJ, Smith RC. Relationship of spontaneous passage of ureteral calculi to stone size and location as revealed by unenhanced helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;178(1):101–103.
  3. EAU Guidelines on Urolithiasis 2024. European Association of Urology; 2024.
Important: The STONE score is a validated clinical prediction aid and is not a substitute for physician assessment, laboratory evaluation, or diagnostic imaging. Individual results depend on accurate history-taking and urinalysis technique. A score in any band does not confirm or exclude a ureteral stone or rule out other serious causes of flank pain. Always consult a physician for diagnosis and management.

Use this with

References 3 sources
  1. Moore CL et al. BMJ 2014
  2. EAU Urolithiasis Guidelines 2024
  3. Coll DM et al. AJR 2002
Dr. W Rivero, MD

W Rivero, MD, FPCP, DPSN

Specialist in Internal Medicine, Nephrology, and Clinical Nutrition. Practicing integrative and evidence-based nephrology across Quezon City, Pampanga, and Bulacan.

· Book an Appointment →

QR code — scan to save Dr. Rivero's contact info

Scan and save

All Calculators Related Guides