The Effect of Anal Packing on Urinary Retention after Hemorrhoidectomy under the Spinal Anesthesia

Kim, Seong Bae; Kong, Myoung Hoon; Lee, Mi Kyoung; Kim, Nan Sook; Choi, Young Seok; Lim, Sang Ho

doi:10.4097/kjae.2000.38.1.30

Cited by 4 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After removal of duplicate records, 6415 reports were identified of which 48 studies (5644 participants) were included in the review ( Fig . ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Eleven , , , , were judged at high risk of bias; these studies evaluated pharmacological (7 studies) and non‐pharmacological (3) interventions for the prevention of PO‐UR, and a pharmacological intervention (1 study) for the treatment of PO‐UR. There were 27 studies , , , , , , , rated as having some concerns; these studies evaluated pharmacological (16 studies) and non‐pharmacological (5) interventions for the prevention of PO‐UR, and pharmacological (2) and non‐pharmacological (4) interventions for treating PO‐UR.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…0·31 to 0·98; 1 trial). Trials investigating other non‐pharmacological interventions, including electroacupuncture, external bladder stimulator, postoperative anal packing after haemorrhoidectomy and straight catheterization in the recovery room, found no evidence for a reduction in PO‐UR.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Systematic review of interventions for the prevention and treatment of postoperative urinary retention

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPostoperative urinary retention (PO‐UR) is an acute and painful inability to void after surgery that can lead to complications and delayed hospital discharge. Standard treatment with a urinary catheter is associated with a risk of infection and can be distressing, undignified and uncomfortable. This systematic review aimed to identify effective interventions for the prevention and treatment of PO‐UR that might be alternatives to urinary catheterization.MethodsElectronic databases were searched from inception to September 2017. Randomized trials of interventions for the prevention or treatment of PO‐UR were eligible for inclusion. Studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane (2.0) tool. Two reviewers were involved at all review stages. Where possible, data were pooled using random‐effects meta‐analysis. The overall quality of the body of evidence was rated using the GRADE approach.ResultsSome 48 studies involving 5644 participants were included. Most interventions were pharmacological strategies to prevent PO‐UR. Based on GRADE, there was high‐certainty evidence to support replacing morphine in a regional anaesthetic regimen, using alpha‐blockers (number needed to treat to prevent one case of PO‐UR (NNT) 5, 95 per cent c.i. 5 to 7), the antispasmodic drug drotaverine (NNT 9, 7 to 30) and early postoperative mobilization (NNT 5, 4 to 8) for prevention, and employing hot packs or gauze soaked in warm water for treatment (NNT 2, 2 to 4). Very few studies reported on secondary outcomes of pain, incidence of urinary tract infection or duration of hospital stay.ConclusionPromising interventions exist for PO‐UR, but they need to be evaluated in randomized trials investigating comparative clinical and cost effectiveness, and acceptability to patients.

show abstract

“…After removal of duplicate records, 6415 reports were identified of which 48 studies (5644 participants) were included in the review ( Fig . ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Systematic review of interventions for the prevention and treatment of postoperative urinary retention

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The aetiology of postoperative acute urinary retention is largely unknown, but it may be caused by the dysfunction of bladder muscles in response to pain (Corno et al ., 1995; Kim et al ., 2000) or by excessive perioperative fluid administration (Corno et al ., 1995; Jee et al ., 1997). Acute urinary retention after haemorrhoidectomy might be due to intraoperative anaesthesia or to an interruption of either the sensory innervation of the bladder wall or the motor supply of the detrusor muscle, or it may be a side effect of the anaesthesia medication (Ringdal et al ., 2003; Ng et al ., 2006a, 2006b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies have found a prevalence of acute urinary retention between 4·9 and 46·1% after haemorrhoidectomies (Jee et al, 1997;Zaheer et al, 1998;Kim et al, 2000;Sayfan, 2001;Ng et al, 2006aNg et al, , 2006bToyanaga et al, 2006;Mik et al, 2008;Lin et al, 2010). Lin et al (2010) used a retrospective chart review to explore the prevalence of acute urinary retention and found that 32·8% of patients experienced acute urinary retention after haemorrhoidectomy in southern Taiwan.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Crede's method on urine voiding within the first 8 h after surgery among post‐haemorrhoidectomy patients: a comparison study

Lin

Chi

Liu

et al. 2012

Int J of Uro Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urinary retention is a common complication among patients after haemorrhoidectomy. Although Crede's method is recommended for urinary retention in nursing practice textbooks, its effects require further examination. The purpose of this study was to investigate the rate of urine voiding within the first 8 h following haemorrhoidectomy and to examine the effects of Crede's method on this postoperative outcome. A two‐group comparison study was conducted. All participants were over 20 years of age, and each had undergone haemorrhoidectomy. Outcome measurements included patients' self‐reported urine voiding within 8 h of surgery, personal demographics and disease‐related data. Before the surgical procedure, participants were divided into Crede's group and non‐Crede's group, and written educational materials were given. Patients in the Crede's group were taught Crede's method for application in the event that they were unable to void urine after haemorrhoidectomy. The non‐Crede's group patients were taught traditional methods without Crede's method. We examined urine voiding within the first 8 h after haemorrhoidectomy. The mean rate of urine voiding within 8 h of surgery was 60·9% overall, with 91·3% (21/23) in the Crede's group and 30·4% (7/23) in the non‐Crede's group reporting successful voiding. After controlling for the two groups' personal characteristics and disease‐related variables, age, educational level and perioperative fluid administration were treated as covariates and included in the multinomial logistic regression model. The odds ratio of urine voiding within the first 8 h after surgery was 52·70‐fold higher in the Crede's group than in the non‐Crede's group (p < 0·01). This study shows that Crede's method is an effective strategy to aid in urine voiding within the first eight postsurgical hours among patients following haemorrhoidectomy. Clear and concise information about urinary retention and related management strategies should be given to patients before haemorrhoidectomy.

show abstract

Haemorrhoidectomy: prevalence and risk factors of urine retention among post recipients

Lin

Liu

Chen

2010

Journal of Clinical Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Effect of Anal Packing on Urinary Retention after Hemorrhoidectomy under the Spinal Anesthesia

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Systematic review of interventions for the prevention and treatment of postoperative urinary retention

Systematic review of interventions for the prevention and treatment of postoperative urinary retention

Effects of Crede's method on urine voiding within the first 8 h after surgery among post‐haemorrhoidectomy patients: a comparison study

Haemorrhoidectomy: prevalence and risk factors of urine retention among post recipients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About