Major articleNovel low-resource intervention reduces urinary catheter use and associated urinary tract infections: Role of outcome measure bias?

- We evaluated a low-resource education intervention targeting urinary catheter use.
- The intervention led to a significant reduction in urinary catheter utilization.
- There was no significant change in the incidence rates of urinary tract infections.
- Urinary infection rates may be susceptible to misclassification and surveillance bias.
- Further studies should consider the use of more robust outcome metrics.

BackgroundPrevious interventions targeting nosocomial urinary tract infections have reduced catheterization and infections, but they require significant resources and may be susceptible to misclassification and surveillance bias. We sought to determine the effectiveness of a novel intervention at reducing catheterization and infections while exploring the potential for bias.MethodsWe conducted a prospective study of a brief monthly in-person educational intervention focusing on appropriate urinary catheter use.ResultsWe studied 1,335 patients (13,753 patient days) on 1 control and 1 intervention ward. After the intervention, the device utilization rate was significantly reduced, with a relative risk of 0.49 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.76; P = .001) versus 1.02 (95% CI, 0.58-1.82; P = .93) for controls. Both wards demonstrated a reduction in catheter-associated infections after intervention, with an intervention relative risk of 0.42 (95% CI, 0.16-1.08; P = .07) and 0.51 (95% CI, 0.22-1.20; P = .12) for controls. There was no change in the rate of all nosocomial urine infections, with an intervention relative risk of 0.79 (95% CI, 0.38-1.65; P = .53) and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.48-1.67; P = .72) for controls.ConclusionOur study demonstrates that our novel educational intervention significantly reduces urinary catheter use in hospitalized patients. The trend towards reduced catheter-associated infections after intervention, coupled with the absence of an improvement in all nosocomial infections supports a potential role of misclassification bias. We suggest that future prospective investigations explore this phenomenon using more robust outcome measures.