Identifying safe practices for use of the urinary leg bag drainage system in the postacute and long-term care setting: An integrative review

Bradley, Sharon; Schweon, Steven J.; Mody, Lona; Mahajan, Dheeraj; Olmsted, Russell N.

doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2018.03.029

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this group, the bag was replaced by syringes to close the catheter outlet, 43.8% of the cases, glass ampoules in 28.1% and 3.1% used a nylon cord to tie the catheter and prevent urine output. This finding contradicts the scientific evidence and national and international recommendations on maintaining a closed drainage system after aseptic insertion to avoid the risk of urinary tract infection associated with the catheter (24,32) . It is worth mentioning that the service had a urine collection bag, but the fact that patients did not use the bag may be associated with the lack of guidance from the health team or perhaps because of body image, an unproven inference.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Quality of life and body image of patients with urinary disorders

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: to assess the quality of life and body image of men with difficulty urinating and indwelling urinary catheter users, integrating the socio-demographic, economic and morbidity variables. Method: a cross-sectional analytical study with 64 male patients with urinary problems. Three questionnaires were used for data collection: one containing sociodemographic, economic and morbid data, the Medical Outcome Study 36-item short-form health survey to analyze quality of life, and the Body Dysmorphic Examination, which assesses body image. T-test, Mann-Whitney, Pearson, Spearman, Linear Regression and Stepwise were used. Results: quality of life and body image were compromised in both groups, affecting emotional aspects, with a high degree of body dissatisfaction and altered physical and social adversity. Conclusion: changes in patients’ quality of life and body image were observed, confirming the need for improvement in care.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Quality of life and body image of patients with urinary disorders

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the quality of the evidence supporting the net clinical benefit of these guidelines is low (Category IB; Gould et al, 2019). In some studies, breaks in the closed urinary drainage system have not been shown to result in immediate harm (Bradley et al, 2018). Furthermore, the standard recommendation not to replace the drainage bag at routine, fixed intervals is poorly supported in terms of the tradeoff between clinical benefits and harm (Category II; Gould et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the Incidence of Urinary Tract Infection by Replacement Time of the Urinary Drainage System

Chen

et al. 2021

Journal of Nursing Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Urinary catheters (UCs) with a closed urinary drainage system have been widely used in patients for many years. However, the frequency of replacing and operating these devices may be associated with catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI). Purpose This study was designed to compare the incidence of CAUTI by replacement time (every 14 or ≥ 15 days) of the urinary drainage system. Methods This 1-year prospective, nonrandomized controlled study was conducted in a major teaching hospital. The Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Nonrandomized Designs Statement checklist was used. All of the patients with UCs were divided into two groups based on each patient's preference with regard to replacement time of the urinary drainage system. Results Five hundred sixty-two patients were evaluated, and 341 patients with UCs were enrolled as participants in the study. In the per-protocol analysis, 16 patients (22.2%; 9.3 episodes/1,000 catheter-days) in the 14-day group and 15 patients (17.9%; relative risk = 1.24, 95% confidence interval [0.66, 2.34]) in the ≥ 15-day group (7.7 episodes/1,000 catheter-days; incidence density ratio 1.20, 95% confidence interval [0.60, 2.43]) had CAUTIs. A comparison of cleanliness within urinary bags showed no significant intergroup difference (p > .05). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the incidence of CAUTI between the two groups was also not significantly different (p > .05). Conclusions No statistically significant difference in the incidence of CAUTI was identified between patients who used the 14-day replacement interval and those who used the ≥ 15-day replacement interval for their urinary drainage system.

show abstract