We aimed to reduce the number of manual urine microscopy examinations safely by cross-interpretation of the Sysmex UF-100 (TOA Medical Electronics, Kobe, Japan) and urine strip results such that microscopy would be performed if there was discordance between the UF-100 and urine strip results. We also evaluated the usefulness of the optional UF-100 expert software. We performed 2 studies: study 1 to establish review rules for eventual microscopic examination; study 2, a validation study. Our review rates were 40% and 48% and those of UF-100 software were 16% and 32% for the 2 studies. Our false-positive and false-negative results, among the samples not flagged for microscopic review, were acceptably low. We did not find a good correlation between the microscopic classification of RBC morphologic features and the classification given by the UF-100. Since incorporation of the automated urine strip reader and the UF-100 in routine use, our manual microscopy has been reduced to less than 40%.