Policies for replacing long-term indwelling urinary catheters in adults

Cooper, Fergus; Alexander, Cameron E.; Sinha, Sanjay; Omar, Muhammad Imran

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd011115.pub2

Cited by 23 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One of them mentioned the sex/gender implications for clinical practice by stating that “Siliconised catheters may be less likely to cause urethral side effects in men” [102]. The other two reviews considered the implications of sex/gender for research by stating that “sub-group analysis would give valuable data as to whether certain policies are more effective in sub-groups such as females” [103], or “Future trials comparing suprapubic and intermittent urethral catheterisation for short-term use in hospitalised men should be conducted [...]” [104]. However, no review addressed the implications of sex/gender for policy and regulation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consideration of sex and gender in Cochrane reviews of interventions for preventing healthcare-associated infections: a methodology study

López‐Alcalde

Stallings

Nunes³

et al. 2019

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHealthcare-associated infections (HAIs) are common and increase morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. Their control continues to be an unresolved issue worldwide. HAIs epidemiology shows sex/gender differences. Thus the lack of consideration of sex/gender in Cochrane reviews will limit their applicability and capacity to support informed decisions. This study aims to describe the extent to which Cochrane reviews of interventions for preventing HAIs consider sex and gender.MethodsMethodology study appraising Cochrane reviews of interventions to prevent HAIs. Search methods: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from 1995 (launch of the journal) to 31 December 2016. Two authors independently extracted data with EPPI-Reviewer 4 software, and independently appraised the sex/gender content of the reviews with the Sex and Gender Appraisal Tool for Systematic Reviews (SGAT-SR).ResultsThis study included 113 reviews assessing the effects of interventions for preventing HAIs. 100 reviews (88%) used at least one sex or gender-related term. The terminology used was heterogeneous, being “sex” the term used in more reviews (51%). No review defined neither sex nor gender. Thus we could not assess the definitions provided. Consideration of sex and gender was practically absent in the included reviews; in fact, no review met all the applicable items of the SGAT-SR, and 51 reviews (50%) fulfilled no item. No review provided a complete description of the sex and the gender of the samples of the included studies. Only ten reviews (10%) planned to perform sex- and gender-based analysis and only three (3%) could complete the analysis. The method chosen was always the subgroup analysis based on sex (one review) or gender (two reviews). Three reviews (3%) considered sex or gender-related findings in the conclusions.ConclusionConsideration of sex and gender in Cochrane reviews of interventions for preventing HAIs was practically absent. This lack of attention to sex and gender reduces the quality of Cochrane reviews, and their applicability for all people: women and men, boys and girls, and people of diverse gender identities. Cochrane should attempt to address the shortfalls detected.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4001-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consideration of sex and gender in Cochrane reviews of interventions for preventing healthcare-associated infections: a methodology study

López‐Alcalde

Stallings

Nunes³

et al. 2019

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cleaning the insertion site with chlorhexidine or saline solution did not alter the incidence of catheter associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI). The use of antibiotics at the time of catheter change did not change the incidence of infection associated with the change ( 18 ). The use of antibiotics at the time of catheter change is therefore not recommended even in patients with artificial implants.…”

Section: Management Of Long Term Cathetersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Update on voiding dysfunction managed with suprapubic catheterization

English

2017

Transl. Androl. Urol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the population ages the prevalence of long-term urinary catheters, especially in the elderly, is going to increase. Urinary catheters are usually placed to manage urinary retention or incontinence that cannot be managed any other way. There is significant morbidity associated with an indwelling catheter. The commonest problems are catheter blockages, infection and bladder stones. These will occur with a similar incidence with either a suprapubic or a urethral catheter. Urethral complications such as strictures, scrotal infection and erosion are less common with suprapubic catheterization (SPC). However the benefit of having a SPC needs to be balanced against the risks involved in inserting the catheter suprapubically. Patient reported symptoms show that a SPC is more comfortable and better tolerated than a urethral catheter. However there needs to be more research into developing better catheters that reduce the frequency of urinary infections and blockages and hence catheter morbidity.

show abstract

“…Issues related to mechanical and catheter fitting found in our study may necessitate catheter replacement (Cravens & Zweig, 2000). It is important to state that there is a lack of evidence to support a specific time interval between catheter changes (Cooper et al, 2016). In the community catheter supplies are ordered according to predetermined guidelines for replacement, typically once every 4-6 weeks depending on type of urinary catheter material (Geng et al, 2012;McGoldrick, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Home Care Nursing Visits and Same-Day Emergency Department Use: Which Patients Are Most at Risk?

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Home care patients are a growing group of community-dwelling older adults with complex care needs and high health service use. Adult home care patients are at high risk for emergency department (ED) visits, which is greater on the same day as a nursing visit. Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine whether common nursing indicators modified the association between nursing visits and same-day ED visits. Methods A case-crossover design within a retrospective cohort of adult home care patients in Ontario. Results A total of 11,840 home care nursing patients were analyzed. Home care patients who received a home nursing visit were more likely to go the ED afterhours on the same day with a stronger association for visits not admitted to the hospital. Having a urinary catheter increased the risk of a same-day ED visit (OR: 1.78 (95% CI 1.15–1.60) vs. 1.21 (95% CI 1.15–1.28)). No other clinical indicator modified the association. Conclusions The findings of this study can be used to inform care policies and practices for home care nurses in the management of indwelling urinary catheter complications. Further examination of system factors such as capacity and resources available to respond to catheter related complications in the community setting are recommended.

show abstract

Policies for replacing long-term indwelling urinary catheters in adults

Cited by 23 publications

References 56 publications

Consideration of sex and gender in Cochrane reviews of interventions for preventing healthcare-associated infections: a methodology study

Consideration of sex and gender in Cochrane reviews of interventions for preventing healthcare-associated infections: a methodology study

Update on voiding dysfunction managed with suprapubic catheterization

Home Care Nursing Visits and Same-Day Emergency Department Use: Which Patients Are Most at Risk?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About