There is controversy about having "annual" physicals.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4781138

http://www.pamf.org/preventive/healtheval.html

It reminds me of the last question I answered from somebody who asked me
what can cause protein in the urine. He was concerned about it. I told him a
lot of things but blood pressure was one. He said that his blood pressure
was 180/110 and out of control at the time and was seeing his doctor about
it. BINGO.

Most pre employment physicals always include a UA. I think most of the
impact is here. I have known denial of employment with abnormal UA findings.
Some UA's are only dipstick screens and if everything is normal then the
microscopic exam can be skipped or credited and cost less.

So my final answer is it depends on why you are doing the physical. The
physical itself may not be needed or if it's been a while then it may be
needed for certain conditions.
My doctor has never ordered one for a regular physical with me and in
general I think it yields very little in most asymptomatic cases and has
taken a hit on hospital admissions also.

Is there a screening benefit to conducting urinalyis at every physical?

Can you be more specific? There is no debate that a urinalysis is useful.
What context are you referring to?

Could someone steer me in the right direction for recent debate on the
clinical value of routine urinalysis?