کد مقاله کد نشریه سال انتشار مقاله انگلیسی نسخه تمام متن
1076187 1486541 2013 10 صفحه PDF دانلود رایگان
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله ISI
Intermittent versus indwelling urinary catheterisation in hip surgery patients: A randomised controlled trial with cost-effectiveness analysis
موضوعات مرتبط
علوم پزشکی و سلامت پزشکی و دندانپزشکی سیاست های بهداشت و سلامت عمومی
پیش نمایش صفحه اول مقاله
Intermittent versus indwelling urinary catheterisation in hip surgery patients: A randomised controlled trial with cost-effectiveness analysis
چکیده انگلیسی

BackgroundHip surgery is associated with the risk of postoperative urinary retention. To avoid urinary retention hip surgery patients undergo urinary catheterisation. Urinary catheterisation, however, is associated with increased risk for urinary tract infection (UTI). At present, there is limited evidence for whether intermittent or indwelling urinary catheterisation is the preferred choice for short-term bladder drainage in patients undergoing hip surgery.ObjectivesThe aim of the study was to investigate differences between intermittent and indwelling urinary catheterisation in hip surgery patients in relation to nosocomial UTI and cost-effectiveness.DesignRandomised controlled trial with cost-effectiveness analysis.SettingThe study was carried out at an orthopaedic department at a Swedish University Hospital.MethodsOne hundred and seventy hip surgery patients (patients with fractures or with osteoarthritis) were randomly allocated to either intermittent or indwelling urinary catheterisation. Data collection took place at four time points: during stay in hospital, at discharge and at 4 weeks and 4 months after discharge.ResultsEighteen patients contracted nosocomial UTIs, 8 in the intermittent catheterisation group and 10 in the indwelling catheterisation group (absolute difference 2.4%, 95% CI −6.9–11.6%) The patients in the intermittent catheterisation group were more often catheterised (p < 0.001) and required more bladder scans (p < 0.001) but regained normal bladder function sooner than the patients in the indwelling catheterisation group (p < 0.001). Fourteen percent of the patients in the intermittent group did not need any catheterisation. Cost-effectiveness was similar between the indwelling and intermittent urinary catheterisation methods.ConclusionsBoth indwelling and intermittent methods could be appropriate in clinical practice. Both methods have advantages and disadvantages but by not using routine indwelling catheterisation, unnecessary catheterisations might be avoided in this patient group.

ناشر
Database: Elsevier - ScienceDirect (ساینس دایرکت)
Journal: International Journal of Nursing Studies - Volume 50, Issue 12, December 2013, Pages 1589–1598
نویسندگان
, , , , , ,