Journal Article

Trial to compare mixed-use (multi-use and single-use) intermittent catheter management with single-use management over 12 months (The MultICath Trial): protocol for a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial

Macaulay, Margaret, Murphy, Cathy, Watson, Gillian, Guerrero, Karen, Fader, Mandy, Khasriya, Rajvinder, Cottenden, Alan, Hagen, Suzanne, Little, Paul, Avery, Miriam R, Chadwick, Thomas J, McClurg, Doreen, Goudie, Nicola, Dickson, Sylvia, Abouhajar, Alaa, Moore, Michael, Clancy, Bridget, Wilks, Sandra A, Wilson, Nina, Jones, Jeremy, James, Catherine P, Buckley, Brian S, Shields, Carol, May, Carl R, Reading, Isabel, Broadbridge, Jackie, Prieto, Jacqui, Timoney, Anthony

2024

Overview

IntroductionEvaluating the safety and acceptability of reusing catheters for intermittent catheterisation (IC) is one of the top 10 continence research priorities identified by the UK James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership in 2008. There are an estimated 50 000 IC users in England and this number is rising. Globally, both single-use catheters (thrown away after use) and multi-use/reusable ones (cleaned between uses) are used. Using multi-use catheters as well as single-use ones (mixed-use) could bring benefits (eg, reducing plastic waste and patients never running out of catheters) and offer more choice to users. Evidence is needed that mixed-use is at least as safe and acceptable as using only single-use catheters.MethodsThe MultICath Trial is a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial involving 578 participants. The aim is to compare mixed-use catheter management with single-use catheter management over 12 months. Participants are randomised on a 1:1 basis to either mixed-use catheter management, which includes an evidence-based cleaning method for the multi-use catheters (intervention) or single-use catheter management (control). Following randomisation, participants are followed up for 12 months. The primary outcome is at least one episode of microbiologically confirmed symptomatic urinary tract infection with help-seeking or self-help behaviour over the 12-month follow-up period. Laboratory analysis of patient-initiated urine samples is blind. Secondary outcomes include antibiotic use, microhaematuria, visible blood on catheter/in urine, quality of life and health economics. A qualitative sub-study to examine participant experiences using mixed-use is included.Ethics and disseminationEthical review was undertaken by South Central-Hampshire A Research Ethics Committee and favourable opinion was granted on 12 July 2019 (reference: 19/SC/0334). Written, informed consent to participate was obtained from all participants. Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications, in the National Institute for Health and Care Research journal library and to participants and the public via a lay summary published on the trial website.Trial registration number ISRCTN42028483.

• Publisher: British Medical Journal Publishing Group,BMJ Publishing Group LTD,BMJ Publishing Group
• Subject: adult urology / Antibiotics / Bladder / Catheter-Related Infections - prevention & control / Catheters / Cost analysis / Design / England / Equipment Reuse / Equivalence Trials as Topic / Female / Help seeking behavior / Humans / intermittent catheterisation / Intermittent Urethral Catheterization - instrumentation / Laboratories / multi-use urinary catheter / Pain / Protocol / Quality of Life / Questionnaires / Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic / Self help / urinary catheter management / Urinary Catheterization - adverse effects / Urinary Catheterization - methods / Urinary Catheters / urinary incontinence / Urinary retention / Urinary tract infections / Urinary Tract Infections - prevention & control / Urine / Urology