Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Urinary and (peripheral and central) intravenous catheters are widely used in hospitalized patients. However, up to 56% of the catheters do not have an appropriate indication and some serious complications with the use of these catheters can occur. The main objective of our quality improvement project is to reduce the use of catheters without an appropriate indication by 25–50%, and to evaluate the affecting factors of our de-implementation strategy. Methods In a multicenter, prospective interrupted time series analysis, several interventions to avoid inappropriate use of catheters will be conducted in seven hospitals in the Netherlands. Firstly, we will define a list of appropriate indications for urinary and (peripheral and central) intravenous catheters, which will restrict the use of catheters and urge catheter removal when the indication is no longer appropriate. Secondly, after the baseline measurements, the intervention will take place, which consists of a kick-off meeting, including a competitive feedback report of the baseline measurements, and education of healthcare workers and patients. Additional strategies based on the baseline data and local conditions are optional. The primary endpoint is the percentage of catheters with an inappropriate indication on the day of data collection before and after the de-implementation strategy. Secondary endpoints are catheter-related infections or other complications, catheter re-insertion rate, length of hospital (and ICU) stay and mortality. In addition, the cost-effectiveness of the de-implementation strategy will be calculated. Discussion This study aims to reduce the use of urinary and intravenous catheters with an inappropriate indication, and as a result reduce the catheter-related complications. If (cost-) effective it provides a tool for a nationwide approach to reduce catheter-related infections and other complications. Trial registration Dutch trial registry: NTR6015 . Registered 9 August 2016.

Background Urinary tract infection (UTI) as the most common healthcare-associated infection accounts for up to 36% of all healthcare-associated infections. Catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) accounts for up to 80% of these. In many instances indwelling urinary catheter (IDC) insertions may be unjustified or inappropriate, creating potentially avoidable and significant patient distress, embarrassment, discomfort, pain and activity restrictions, together with substantial care burden, costs and hospitalisation. Multifaceted interventions combining best practice guidelines with staff engagement, education and monitoring have been shown to be more effective in bringing about practice change than those that focus on a single intervention. This study builds on a nurse-led initiative that identified that significant benefits could be achieved through a systematic approach to implementation of evidence-based practice. Methods The primary aim of the study is to reduce IDC usage rates by reducing inappropriate urinary catheterisation and duration of catheterisation. The study will employ a multiple pre-post control intervention design using a phased mixed method approach. A multifaceted intervention will be implemented and evaluated in four acute care hospitals in NSW, Australia. The study design is novel and strengthened by a phased approach across sites which allows for a built-in control mechanism and also reduces secular effects. Feedback of point prevalence data will be utilised to engage staff and improve compliance. Ward-based champions will help to steward the change and maintain focus. Discussion This study will improve patient safety through implementation and robust evaluation of clinical practice and practice change. It is anticipated that it will contribute to a significant improvement in patient experiences and health care outcomes. The provision of baseline data will provide a platform from which to ensure ongoing improvement and normalisation of best practice. This study will add to the evidence base through enhancing understanding of interventions to reduce CAUTI and provides a prototype for other studies focussed on reduction of hospital acquired harms. Study findings will inform undergraduate and continuing education for health professionals. Trial registration ACTRN12617000090314 . Registered 17 January 2017. Retrospectively registered.

In the wake of an otherwise successful first phase of the National Action Plan to Prevent Health Care–Associated Infections, the reduction in catheter-associated urinary tract infections (UTIs) has been elusive. 1 Increasing rates of infection by 2012 signaled an inability to contain this common infection, even if some of the rise was attributable to broader definitions of catheter-associated UTI instituted earlier that year. A study of the On the CUSP: Stop CAUTI program, reported by Saint et al. 2 in this issue of the Journal, showed a significant reduction in catheter-associated UTIs in inpatient units that were not intensive care units (non-ICUs), . . .

Background and Objective: Hospital-acquired catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) is one of the first 6 conditions Medicare is targeting to reduce payment associated with hospitalacquired conditions under Congressional mandate. This study was to determine the positive predictive value (PPV) and sensitivity in identifying patients in Medicare claims who had urinary catheterization and who had hospital-acquired CAUTIs. Research Design: CAUTIs identified by ICD-9-CM codes in Medicare claims were compared with those revealed by medical record abstraction in random samples of Medicare discharges in 2005 to 2006. Hospital discharge abstracts (2005) from the states of New York and California were used to estimate the potential impact of a present-on-admission (POA) indicator on PPV. Results: ICD-9-CM procedure codes for urinary catheterization appeared in only 1.4% of Medicare claims for patients who had urinary catheters. As a proxy, claims with major surgery had a PPV of 75% and sensitivity of 48%, and claims with any surgical procedure had a PPV of 53% and sensitivity of 79% in identifying urinary catheterization. The PPV and sensitivity for identifying hospital-acquired CAUTIs varied, with the PPV at 30% and sensitivity at 65% in claims with major surgery. About 80% of the secondary diagnosis codes indicating UTIs were flagged as POA, suggesting that the addition of POA indicators in Medicare claims would increase PPV up to 86% and sensitivity up to 79% in identifying hospital-acquired CAUTIs. Conclusions: The validity in identifying urinary catheter use and CAUTIs from Medicare claims is limited, but will be increased substantially upon addition of a POA indicator.

Background The most effective way to reduce catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CA-UTIs) is to avoid unnecessary urinary catheterisation and to minimise the duration of catheterisation. Aim To implement and assess the effect of an intervention to reduce the duration of urinary tract catheterisation. Methods This quality improvement project was set up as a before–after comparison consisting of a 2-month pre-intervention period, a period in which the intervention was implemented and a 2-month post-intervention period. The intervention included educational sessions to increase physicians' awareness and the daily reassessment of catheter use. The primary endpoint was the duration of catheterisation. Secondary endpoints were the catheter utilisation ratio, the length of hospital stay, the number of hospital-acquired symptomatic CA-UTIs and the number of appropriate indications for catheterisation. Results During the total study period, 149 patients (18.3%) were catheterised at some time during their hospital stay. There was a statistically significant decrease in the duration of catheterisation (median 7 vs 5 days; p<0.01), length of hospital stay (median 13 vs 9 days; p<0.01), and number of hospital-acquired CA-UTIs (4 vs 0, p=0.04) in the pre-intervention versus post-intervention period. Conclusions An intervention to raise more awareness of the risks of inappropriate catheterisation can reduce the duration of catheterisation along with the length of hospital stay and the number of hospital-acquired symptomatic CA- UTIs, even in a short period of time.

Background Catheter associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) is one of the most commonly acquired health care associated infections within the United States. We examined the implementation of an initiative to prevent CAUTI, to better understand how health care providers’ perceptions of risk influenced their use of prevention practices and the potential impact these risk perceptions have on patient care decisions. Understanding such perceptions are critical for developing more effective approaches to ensure the successful uptake of key patient safety practices and thus safer care for hospitalized patients. Methods We conducted semi-structured phone and in-person interviews with staff from 12 hospitals. A total of 42 interviews were analyzed using open coding and a constant comparative approach. This analysis identified “risk” as a central theme and a “risk explanatory framework” was identified for its sensitizing constructs to organize and explain our findings. Results We found that multiple perceptions of risk, some non-evidence based, were used by healthcare providers to determine if use of the indwelling urethral catheter was necessary. These risks included normative work where staff deal with competing priorities and must decide which ones to attend too; loosely coupled errors where negative outcomes and the use of urinary catheters were not clearly linked; process weaknesses where risk seemed to be related to both the existing organizational processes and the new initiative being implemented and; workarounds that consisted of health care workers developing workarounds in order to bypass some of the organizational processes created to dissuade catheter use. Conclusions Hospitals that are implementing patient safety initiatives aimed at reducing indwelling urethral catheters should be aware that the risk to the patient is not the only risk of perceived importance; implementation plans should be formulated accordingly.

Background Indwelling urinary catheters are the main cause of healthcare-associated urinary tract infections. It can be expected that reduction of the use of urinary catheters will lead to decreased numbers of urinary tract infection. Methods The efficacy of an intervention programme to improve adherence to recommendations to reduce the use of urethral catheters was studied in a before-after comparison in ten Dutch hospitals. The programme detected barriers and facilitators and each individual facility was supported with developing their own intervention strategy. Outcome was evaluated by the prevalence of catheters, alternatives such as diapers, numbers of urinary tract infections, the percentage of correct indications and the duration of catheterization. The costs of the implementation as well as the catheterization were evaluated. Results Of a population of 16,495 hospitalized patients 3335 patients of whom 2943 were evaluable for the study, had a urethral catheter. The prevalence of urethral catheters decreased insignificantly in neurology (OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.77 - 1.13) and internal medicine wards (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.83 - 1.13), decreased significantly in surgical wards (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.75 - 0.96), but increased significantly in intensive care (IC) and coronary care (CC) units (OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.01 - 2.17). The use of alternatives was limited and remained so after the intervention. Duration of catheterization decreased insignificantly in IC/CC units (ratio after/before 0.95; 95% CI 0.78 - 1.16) and neurology (ratio 0.97; 95% CI 0.80 - 1.18) and significantly in internal medicine (ratio 0.81; 95% CI 0.69 - 0.96) and surgery wards (ratio 0.80; 95% CI 0.71 - 0.90). The percentage of correct indications on the day of inclusion increased from 50 to 67% (p < 0.0001). The prevalence of urinary tract infections in catheterized patients did not change. The mean cost saved per 100 patients was € 537. Conclusion Targeted implementation of recommendations from an existing guideline can lead to better adherence and cost savings. Especially, hospitals which use a lot of urethral catheters or where catheterization is prolonged, can expect important improvements.

An audit of charts from patients identified as having an indwelling urinary catheter (IDC) was conducted in a 450-bed, tertiary level hospital (Concord Repatriation General Hospital) in Australia. Documentation of relevant information regarding IDC in the medical record included indication for catheterization, insertion and removal dates, use of antibiotics, place of insertion, designation of inserter, catheter type, availability of IDC kits, and use of catheter fixation devices.

The success of reminders and stop orders in reducing urinary catheter use depends upon the environment in which they are deployed. Face-to-face communication increases accountability for the catheter, and has the potential to address nurse reluctance to remove catheters when related to lack of confidence in assessing catheter need. [...]although Janzen et al 23 describe the reminder intervention as a simple daily review of catheter use and recommended reminder by nurses to physicians, the success of this intervention may reflect its implementation in the context of an established routine of daily bedside conversation, rather than expecting physicians or nurses to review independently, or nurses to contact physicians outside of existing routine interactions to remind them about catheter removal.

This study examined the effect of obesity on the use of indwelling urinary catheters among long-term care facility residents and found initial increases in usage by weight category, which declined during the next 12 months.