Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Patients with non-acute spinal cord injury that carry indwelling urinary catheters have an increased risk of urinary tract infection (UTIs). Antiseptic Silver Alloy-Coated Silicone Urinary Catheters seems to be a promising intervention to reduce UTIs; however, actual evidence cannot be extrapolated to spinal cord injured patients. The aim of this trial is to make a comparison between the use of antiseptic silver alloy-coated silicone urinary catheters and the use of standard urinary catheters in spinal cord injured patients to prevent UTIs. Methods/Design The study will consist in an open, randomized, multicentre, and parallel clinical trial with blinded assessment. The study will include 742 spinal cord injured patients who require at least seven days of urethral catheterization as a method of bladder voiding. Participants will be online centrally randomized and allocated to one of the two study arms (silver alloy-coated or standard catheters). Catheters will be used for a maximum period of 30 days or removed earlier if the clinician considers it necessary. The main outcome will be the incidence of UTIs by the time of catheter removal or at day 30 after catheterization, the event that occurs first. Intention-to-treat analysis will be performed, as well as a primary analysis of all patients. Discussion The aim of this study is to assess whether silver alloy-coated silicone urinary catheters improve ITUs in spinal cord injured patients. ESCALE is intended to be the first study to evaluate the efficacy of the silver alloy-coated catheters in spinal cord injured patients. Trial registration NCT01803919

IntroductionHarm from catheter-associated urinary tract infections is a common, potentially avoidable, healthcare complication. Variation in catheter prevalence may exist and provide opportunity for reducing harm, yet to date is poorly understood. This study aimed to determine variation in the prevalence of urinary catheters between patient groups, settings, specialities and over time.MethodsA prospective study (July 2012 to April 2016) of National Health Service (NHS) patients surveyed by healthcare professionals, following a standardised protocol to determine the presence of a urinary catheter and duration of use, on 1 day per month using the NHS Safety Thermometer.Results1314 organisations (253 NHS trusts) and 9 266 284 patients were included. Overall, 12.9% of patients were catheterised, but utilisation varied. There was higher utilisation of catheters in males (15.7% vs 10.7% p<0.001) and younger people (18–70 year 14.0% vs >70 year 12.8% p<0.001), utilisation was highest in hospital settings (18.6% p<0.001), particularly in critical care (76.6% p<0.001). Most catheters had been in situ <28 days (72.9% p<0.001). No clinically significant changes were seen over time in any setting or specialty.ConclusionCatheter prevalence in patients receiving NHS-funded care varies according to gender, age, setting and specialty, being most prevalent in males, younger people, hospitals and critical care. Utilisation has changed only marginally over 46 months, and further guidance is indicated to provide clarity for clinicians on the insertion and removal of catheters to supplement the existing guidance on care.

Catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) is considered a reasonably preventable event in the hospital setting, and it has been included in the US Department of Health and Human Services National Action Plan to Prevent Healthcare-Associated Infections. While multiple definitions for measuring CAUTI exist, each has important limitations, and understanding these limitations is important to both clinical practice and policy decisions. The National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) surveillance definition, the most frequently used outcome measure for CAUTI prevention efforts, has limited clinical correlation and does not necessarily reflect noninfectious harms related to the catheter. We advocate use of the device utilization ratio (DUR) as an additional performance measure for potential urinary catheter harm. The DUR is patient-centered and objective and is currently captured as part of NHSN reporting. Furthermore, these data are readily obtainable from electronic medical records. The DUR also provides a more direct reflection of improvement efforts focused on reducing inappropriate urinary catheter use. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2016;37(3):327–333

Purpose We aimed to evaluate the impact of a multidimensional infection control strategy for the reduction of the incidence of catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) in patients hospitalized in adult intensive care units (AICUs) of hospitals which are members of the International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium (INICC), from 40 cities of 15 developing countries: Argentina, Brazil, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, India, Lebanon, Macedonia, Mexico, Morocco, Panama, Peru, Philippines, and Turkey. Methods We conducted a prospective before–after surveillance study of CAUTI rates on 56,429 patients hospitalized in 57 AICUs, during 360,667 bed-days. The study was divided into the baseline period (Phase 1) and the intervention period (Phase 2). In Phase 1, active surveillance was performed. In Phase 2, we implemented a multidimensional infection control approach that included: (1) a bundle of preventive measures, (2) education, (3) outcome surveillance, (4) process surveillance, (5) feedback of CAUTI rates, and (6) feedback of performance. The rates of CAUTI obtained in Phase 1 were compared with the rates obtained in Phase 2, after interventions were implemented. Results We recorded 253,122 urinary catheter (UC)-days: 30,390 in Phase 1 and 222,732 in Phase 2. In Phase 1, before the intervention, the CAUTI rate was 7.86 per 1,000 UC-days, and in Phase 2, after intervention, the rate of CAUTI decreased to 4.95 per 1,000 UC-days [relative risk (RR) 0.63 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.55–0.72)], showing a 37 % rate reduction. Conclusions Our study showed that the implementation of a multidimensional infection control strategy is associated with a significant reduction in the CAUTI rate in AICUs from developing countries.

BACKGROUND Urinary catheters, many of which are placed in the emergency department (ED) setting, are often inappropriate, and they are associated with infectious and noninfectious complications. Although several studies evaluating the effect of interventions have focused on reducing catheter use in the ED setting, the organizational contexts within which these interventions were implemented have not been compared. METHODS A total of 18 hospitals in the Ascension health system (ie, system-based hospitals) and 16 hospitals in the state of Michigan (ie, state-based hospitals led by the Michigan Health and Hospital Association) implemented ED interventions focused on reducing urinary catheter use. Data on urinary catheter placement in the ED, indications for catheter use, and presence of physician order for catheter placement were collected for interventions in both hospital types. Multilevel negative binomial regression was used to compare the system-based versus state-based interventions. RESULTS A total of 13,215 patients (889 with catheters) from the system-based intervention were compared to 12,104 patients (718 with catheters) from the state-based intervention. Statistically significant and sustainable reductions in urinary catheter placement (incidence rate ratio, 0.79; P=.02) and improvements in appropriate use of urinary catheters (odds ratio [OR], 1.86; P=.004) in the ED were observed in the system-based intervention, compared to the state-based intervention. Differences by collaborative structure in changes in presence of physician order for urinary catheter placement (OR, 1.14; P=.60) were not observed. CONCLUSIONS An ED intervention consisting of establishing institutional guidelines for appropriate catheter placement and identifying clinical champions to promote adherence was associated with reducing unnecessary urinary catheter use under a system-based collaborative structure. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:77-84.

Safety champions are effective in a variety of safety initiatives; however, there are no reports of their role in hospital-acquired infections prevention. We aimed to describe the association of the presence of a physician safety champion with our urinary catheter device utilization ratios (DUR) in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU). Our PICU has incidence rates of catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI) and urinary catheter DUR above the 90th percentile. Using a quasi-experimental design, we compared our DUR when the PICU team was exposed and unexposed (champion's maternity leaves) to a physician safety champion. Hospital acquired infection (HAI) surveillance of all PICU admissions between April 1st 2009 and June 29th 2013 was done prospectively. To ensure stable acuity of the patient population over time, we used the central venous catheter (CVC) DUR as a control. The urinary catheter DUR was 0.44 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42-0.45) during the unexposed period versus 0.39 (95%CI 0.38-0.40) during the exposed period, for an absolute difference of 0.05 (95%CI 0.03-0.06; p<0.0001). The overall CVC DUR increased from 0.57 (95%CI 0.55-0.58) during the unexposed period to 0.63 (95%CI 0.61-0.64) during the exposed period, an absolute increase of 0.06 (95%CI 0.04-0.08; p<0.0001). Comparing the exposed and unexposed periods, adjusting for time trend, we observed a 17% decrease in the urinary catheter DUR when the safety champion was present (odds ratio [OR] 0.83; 95%CI 0.77-0.90). The rate of catheter-associated urinary tract infections did not change. The presence of a unit-based safety champion can have a positive impact on urinary catheter DUR in a PICU.

Introduction and hypothesis There is a paucity of literature on resumption of normal voiding predictors after synthetic retropubic sling insertion and lack of a standardized method of determination. Our goals were to determine the incidence of a successful voiding trial; whether clinical, operative, or urodynamic variables predict discharge with a catheter; and incidence of later retention in those who were initially successful. Methods We performed an internal-review-board (IRB)-approved retrospective chart review of 229 consecutive patients who underwent retropubic sling (TVT, Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA)) from 2001 to 2010. Exclusions were concomitant surgery or cystotomy at the time of retropubic sling insertion. All participants underwent a voiding trial in recovery consisting of 300 cc sterile-water retrograde fill and were discharged home without a catheter after single void of at least 200 cc following catheter removal. Results Of 170 patients, 136 (80 %) passed the voiding trial the same day, with 165 (97 %) passing within 1 day. Factors associated with delayed voiding were age ≥65 years ( p  < 0.05), presence of Valsalva voiding ( p  < 0.01), lower body mass index (BMI) ( p  < 0.05), and higher gravidity ( p  < 0.05) and parity ( p  < 0.01). Age ≥65 years [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.72, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.40–9.90, p  < 0.01] and Valsalva voiding (aOR 3.89, 95 % CI 1.56–9.69, p  < 0.01) remained significant independent predictors in multivariate analysis. Conclusions The majority of patients with retropubic sling can be safely discharged home the same day without a catheter after retrograde fill. Women >65 years or Valsalva voiders had nearly four times the odds of being discharged with a catheter. Summary Most patients resume normal voiding within 24 h after retropubic sling insertion, but >65 years and Valsalva voiding are risk factors for voiding inability at discharge.

A systematic appraisal of evidence suggests that male patients in hospital may be at higher risk for bacteremia following urinary catheter-associated bacteriuria than females. Other risk factors include immunosuppressant medication, red blood cell transfusion, neutropenia, malignancy, and liver disease.

Surgery of obstructive urolithiasis in small ruminants is often unsatisfactory due to postoperative development of strictures. The present study aimed to establish an endoscopic technique for the placement of a transurethral urinary catheter into the bladder of rams. This catheter was used as a removable stent-like drainage. The procedure was performed in three sheep rams that were euthanized and placed for surgery in 45° Trendelenburg position. In one ram, cystotomy was performed via right paramedian laparotomy. A 3 mm flexible fiberscope was introduced into the urinary bladder and advanced via urethra to the tip of the penis. Placing a guide wire through the endoscopic working channel into the urethra enabled the retrograde insertion of a transurethral urinary catheter into the bladder. In two rams, retrograde insertion of a fiberscope was performed. Again, a guidewire was used to insert a balloon catheter into the bladder. Paramedian right laparotomy was performed to ascertain the correct position of the balloon. Both techniques, antero- and retrograde endoscopy, were possible and could be successfully performed. Mucous membranes and urinary microliths were easily observed. Repeated advancing of the endoscope or the catheter resulted in marked damage of the mucous membranes. The patency of the urethra may be restored by means of endoscopic placement of a transurethral catheter in male small ruminants. The applicability and clinical outcome of this procedure as well as the effects on stricture formation should be further examined with controlled clinical studies.

Indwelling urinary catheters (IUCs) are placed frequently in older adults in the emergency department (ED). Though often a critical intervention, IUCs carry significant risks. Our objective was to examine current knowledge, attitudes, and practice of emergency nurses and other providers regarding IUC placement and management in older adults. We surveyed ED providers at a large, urban, academic medical center. We developed questionnaires using items from previously validated instruments and questions created for this study. We also assessed providers’ management of 25 unique clinical scenarios, each representing an established appropriate or inappropriate indication for IUC placement. 129 ED providers participated: 43 nurses and 86 other providers. Ninety-one percent of nurses and 87% of other providers reported comfort with appropriate indications for IUC placement. Despite this, on the clinical vignettes, nurses correctly identified the appropriate approach for IUC placement in only 40% of cases and other providers in only 37%. Practice varied widely between individual providers, with the nurse participants reporting appropriate practice in 16%-64% of clinical scenarios and other providers in 8%-68%. Few nurses or other providers reported reassessing their patients for IUC removal at transfer to the hospital (28% of nurses and 7% of other providers), admission (24% and 14%), or shift change (14% and 8%). Although emergency nurses and other providers report comfort with appropriate indications for IUC placement, reported practice patterns showed inconsistencies with established guidelines. Wide practice variation exists between individual providers. Moreover, nurses and other providers infrequently consider IUC removal after placement.