Clean intermittent catheterization: safe, cost-effective bladder management for male residents of VA nursing homes. A comparison of open and closed catheterization techniques in rehabilitation patients. Bacteriuria in intermittent catheterization users: the effect of sterile versus clean reused catheters. Effect of a single-use sterile catheter for each void on the frequency of bacteriuria in children with neurogenic bladder on intermittent catheterization for bladder emptying. Clean intermittent catheterization in boys using the LoFric catheter. Intermittent catheterisation with hydrophilic-coated catheters (SpeediCath) reduces the risk of clinical urinary tract infection in spinal cord injured patients: a prospective randomised parallel comparative trial. Intermittent catheterization with a prelubricated catheter in spinal cord injured patients: a prospective randomized crossover study. A study comparing sterile and nonsterile urethral catheterization in patients with spinal cord injury. A pilot study comparing two methods of intermittent catheterization: limitations and challenges. A prospective randomized trial of the LoFric hydrophilic coated catheter versus conventional plastic catheter for clean intermittent catheterization. Clean and sterile intermittent catheterization methods in hospitalized patients with spinal cord injury. Intermittent catheterization in the rehabilitation setting: a comparison of clean and sterile technique. A comparison of prelubricated hydrophilic and non-hydrophilic polyvinyl chloride catheters for urethral catheterization.
To compare the safety and cost of clean versus sterile intermittent bladder catheterization in male nursing home residents. To provide evidence to support the hypothesis that intermittent catheterization is a valid, alternative method of bladder management in male residents of long-term care in whom urinary retention is a documented problem.
                Randomized clinical trial.
                Three long-term care sites having predominantly male populations.
                Eighty male veterans, residents of three long-term care facilities, ranging in age from 36 to 96 years with a mean age of 72.
                Standardized procedures for clean and sterile intermittent catheterization (IC) were implemented by staff nurses at each site. Patients were randomized into clean and sterile IC groups. Nursing time and catheterization equipment usage were recorded using bar code readers. Clinical data were collected from the medical chart. Treatment of urinary tract infection was prescribed by the medical personnel responsible for each individual resident.
                We compared the number of treatment episodes for symptomatic bacteriuria between groups randomized to receive either clean or sterile intermittent catheterization. Laboratory analysis of blood and urine was done on predetermined days. Control variables were research site and patient history of urinary tract infection within the last 6 months. A cost comparison of nursing time and equipment usage for the two catheterization techniques was also performed.
                No significant differences were found between clean and sterile groups with regard to number of treatment episodes, time to first infection, type of organism cultured, or cost of antibiotic treatment. The cost of sterile technique was considerably higher both in terms of nursing time and supplies.
                Findings from this study demonstrate that clean technique intermittent catheterization is a safe and cost-effective bladder management technique with male, nursing home residents, despite the frailty of this high risk population. An annual savings of approximately $1460 per patient in nursing time and catheterization supplies could be anticipated if a patient were catheterized an average of four times per day substituting clean IC technique for sterile IC technique. An effective method was sought to decrease the incidence of urinary tract infections acquired by hospitalized rehabilitation patients requiring catheterization. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there was a difference in the incidence of urinary tract infections that occurred following use of two types of intermittent catheterization techniques: open catheterization and closed catheterization. The incidence of infection in both the control (open catheterization) and experimental (closed catheterization) groups was analyzed. In the control group, 9 of 14 patients (5 stroke, 4 spinal cord injured [SCI]) completed all four urine tests. Two patients developed a 20,000 colony count of enterococcus on the fourth urine sample using open catheterization. In the experimental group, 11 (4 stroke, 7 SCI) out of 16 patients maintained colony counts below 100,000 organisms per ml; one patient had a 16,000 colony count using closed catheterization. Qualitative data revealed that patients had a positive response to the closed system. Monthly urine cultures were analyzed at the University of Alberta Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases to determine whether single-use sterile catheters and clean technique reduced the incidence of bacterial colonization in those using long-term intermittent self-catheterization. Thirty subjects with spina bifida, ages 3 years to 16 years, entered a crossover study with random assignment to 6 months of sterile single-use catheters or clean reused catheters. Seventeen subjects were catheterized by a parent or caregiver; 13 were responsible for self-catheterization and cleaning of the catheters. Six months of descriptive data were also collected at Alberta Children's Hospital from a similar group of subjects with spina bifida who used sterile catheters only. In the crossover group, 38% of all urine cultures were positive regardless of whether sterile single-use or clean reused catheters were employed. The other group using only sterile catheters had a 36% positive culture rate. No difference in positive cultures was found between males and females or between children who catheterized themselves and children whose parents catheterized them. The authors concluded that plastic urethral catheters may be reused. The frequency of bacteriuria is high in children with neurogenic bladder on intermittent catheterization for bladder emptying. In an effort to decrease bacteriuria, we examined whether the method of catheter care was responsible for the high rate of bacteriuria. For this, the frequency of bacteriuria was examined in the same patient on single-use sterile catheters and on reused clean catheters.
                A prospective, randomized, crossover trial was conducted with 10 patients who were randomized to 4 months of a new, sterile catheter for intermittent catheterization and 4 months of reuse of a clean catheter for intermittent catheterization. Each week, a urine sample was collected and symptoms of infection and medication use were recorded.
                A total of 158 urine samples were collected during 164 patient-weeks on the new catheter method for each void; 115 (73%) were positive for a pathogen. Of the 161 samples collected during 169 patient-weeks on the standard, reuse method for voiding, 123 (76%) were positive (115 [73%] of 158 vs 123 [76%] of 161). Escherichia coli was the most common pathogen detected during both method periods.
                A new, sterile catheter for each void did not decrease the high frequency of bacteriuria in patients with neurogenic bladder on intermittent catheterization. We compared a recently developed hydrophilic catheter to the standard polyethylene catheter in regard to hematuria, infection and patient satisfaction.
                A hydrophilic LoFric or standard Mentor catheter was assigned at random to 17 and 16 boys, respectively, who were skilled in intermittent self-catheterization. They were evaluated by weekly urinalysis and a questionnaire.
                Significantly fewer episodes of microscopic hematuria occurred in the LoFric than Mentor catheter group (9 episodes in 6 subjects versus 19 episodes in 11, p < 0.05). There were also fewer episodes of bacteriuria in the LoFric group but the difference was not statistically significant. Mean scores plus or minus standard deviation on a visual analogue scale with 0 equal to most and 10 equal to least favorable were LoFric 3.3 +/- 2.8 versus Mentor 4.9 +/- 2.7 for catheter convenience and 2.7 +/- 2.4 versus 4.2 +/- 2.6 for insertion comfort, significantly favoring the LoFric group (p < 0.05 for both). Of the 16 LoFric subjects 13 preferred to continue its use, particularly those with a history of urethral trauma or sphincteric spasm.
                In boys the LoFric catheter appears to cause less trauma. Although it is not reusable and is more expensive than the standard catheter, satisfaction is higher with the LoFric device and for select patients it has significant advantages. To compare the performance of SpeediCath hydrophilic-coated catheters versus uncoated polyvinyl chloride (PVC) catheters, in traumatic spinal cord injured patients presenting with functional neurogenic bladder-sphincter disorders.
                A 1-year, prospective, open, parallel, comparative, randomised, multi centre study included 123 male patients, > or =16 y and injured within the last 6 months. Primary endpoints were occurrence of symptomatic urinary tract infection (UTI) and hematuria. Secondary endpoints were development of urethral strictures and convenience of use. The main hypothesis was that coated catheters cause fewer complications in terms of symptomatic UTIs and hematuria.
                57 out of 123 patients completed the 12-month study. Fewer patients using the SpeediCath hydrophilic-coated catheter (64%) experienced 1 or more UTIs compared to the uncoated PVC catheter group (82%) (p = 0.02). Thus, twice as many patients in the SpeediCath group were free of UTI. There was no significant difference in the number of patients experiencing bleeding episodes (38/55 SpeediCath; 32/59 PVC) and no overall difference in the occurrence of hematuria, leukocyturia and bacteriuria.
                The results indicate that there is a beneficial effect regarding UTI when using hydrophilic-coated catheters. We compared the safety and patient acceptance of a conventional Nélaton and a prelubricated nonhydrophilic catheter in 18 spinal cord injured patients on intermittent catheterization.
                In a prospective crossover study each catheter was used for 7 weeks and the initial course was randomized. Urinalysis and urine culture were performed at 2, 4 and 7 weeks. Urethral trauma was evaluated by urethral cell count on the surface of each catheter used on the last day of each study period. Patient satisfaction was assessed at the end of the study by a questionnaire using multiple visual analog scales.
                Urinary tract infection was identified in 12 and 4 patients on a Nélaton and a prelubricated nonhydrophilic catheter (p = 0.03), while asymptomatic bacteruria was identified in 18 and 8 (p = 0.0244), respectively. The mean urethral cell count plus or minus standard deviation on the catheter surface was 6.7 +/- 2.8 x 10(4) and 15.1 +/- 8.9 x 10(4) for the prelubricated nonhydrophilic and the Néelaton catheter, respectively (p = 0.01). The prelubricated nonhydrophilic catheter resulted in a better mean satisfaction score than the Nélaton catheter (2.33 +/- 1.06 versus 4.72 +/- 2.13, p = 0.022). Urethral bleeding was reported in 2 patients during the study period while using the Nélaton catheter.
                The prelubricated nonhydrophilic catheter is a safe, effective and comfortable option in spinal cord injured patients on intermittent self-catheterization. This study was designed to determine the effect of sterile and nonsterile intermittent catheterization on the incidence of urinary tract infection (UTI) in patients after spinal cord injury. The study included 29 patients with neurogenic bladder dysfunction treated with intermittent catheterization. One group of 14 patients was on sterile catheterization; another group of 15 patients was on nonsterile catheterization. On a weekly basis, urine samples were obtained and analyzed. A total of 122 urine samples were analyzed. The patients on sterile catheterization had a 28.6% UTI incidence; the group using a nonsterile catheterization technique had a UTI incidence of 42.4%. The most common urinary pathogen in both groups was E. coli (65%). The cost of antibiotics for patients on the sterile catheterization program was only 43% of the cost of antibiotics for those on the nonsterile program. However, the sterile kits cost 371% of the cost of the catheterization kits for the patients in the nonsterile program, so the total cost of managing neurogenic bladder on the sterile program was 277% of the cost of the nonsterile program. Given a complex research design, a pilot study was conducted to compare a closed catheter system for intermittent catheterization to the traditional open system. Based on 33 urine samples for 11 subjects, the closed system yielded fewer positive cultures. Efforts to obtain this preliminary data proved beneficial in identifying unanticipated design limitations that will guide modifications of the main study, which will include multiple centers. We compared the incidence of hematuria, pyuria and clinical urinary tract infection in patients who performed intermittent self-catheterization using a hydrophilic coated LoFric (Astra Tech AB, Mölndal, Sweden) or standard plastic catheter.
                A total of 62 male patients who performed intermittent self-catheterization to manage neurogenic bladder were randomized into 2 treatment groups at 3 American study sites. Outcome measures included urinary tract infection, microhematuria, pyuria and satisfaction rates.
                Of the 62 enrolled patients 49 completed the 12-month study. The withdrawal rate was not different in the 2 groups. At the end of the study there was statistically significantly less hematuria in the hydrophilic coated catheter group compared with controls. In addition, there was a significant decrease in the urinary tract infection rate from baseline in the hydrophilic coated catheter group but not in controls.
                Use of the hydrophilic coated catheter by patients on intermittent self-catheterization is associated with less hematuria and a significant decrease in the incidence of urinary tract infections. Therefore, it may be preferable for some patients, especially those with a history of difficult catheterization, urethral trauma or a high rate of urinary tract infection. The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence of urinary infection using clean intermittent catheterization with the incidence of infection using sterile intermittent catheterization in patients hospitalized with spinal cord injury who were not receiving prophylactic antibiotics. Forty-six patients were assigned randomly to a clean (n = 23) or sterile (n = 23) study group. Catheterizations were done at least every six hours. Infection was defined as bacteriuria greater than or equal to 100,000 organisms/mL or greater than or equal to 10,000 organisms per mL with fever of 100 degrees F or greater. Results of urinary dipslides were recorded daily. Twenty-eight subjects (60.9%) converted to greater than or equal to 100,000 organisms per mL. Method of catheterization was neither associated significantly with development of greater than or equal to 100,000 organisms per mL. (X2[1,46] = .36, p = .55) nor with symptomatic infections (X2[1,46] = .15, p = .70). Data support the use of clean intermittent catheterization under the conditions used in this study, including the use of a sterile catheter each day and careful monitoring of infection and technique. Before using this method with other diagnostic groups or in different clinical settings, further investigation is needed. To compare the onset of symptomatic urinary tract infection in individuals with spinal cord injury in a rehabilitation setting who are randomized to clean or sterile intermittent catheterization technique.
                Randomized controlled design.
                Spinal cord rehabilitation units in western Canada.
                Thirty-six patients with cervical spinal cord injuries requiring intermittent catheterization by nursing staff were recruited. None had a previous history of voiding dysfunction or urinary tract infections. Interventions: Subjects were randomized to either clean or sterile intermittent catheterization technique. Protocols for both clean and sterile techniques were standardized and followed by nursing staff and caregivers.
                Primary outcome measure was symptomatic urinary tract infection as diagnosed by urine culture > or = 10(5) colony-forming units/mL, pyuria (> or =10 leukocytes on high-power field), and accompanying symptoms.
                A total of 189 urine specimens from 36 subjects were cultured. Of the 36 subjects, 15 (43%) developed a symptomatic urinary tract infection: 6/16 (37%) from the clean group; 9/20 (45%) from the sterile group (P> 0.05). Mean time to onset for symptomatic urinary tract infection for the clean group was 3.0 (standard deviation (SD) 2.4) weeks and for the sterile group, 3.6 (SD 1.3) weeks (P> 0.05). The most common urinary organisms at onset of symptomatic urinary tract infection were Enterococcus species followed by Klebsiella.
                Clean intermittent catheterization in the rehabilitation setting does not appear to place the patient with spinal cord injury at increased risk for developing symptomatic urinary tract infection, and has significant cost and time saving benefits for the health care system, as well as enhancing the transition for the patient from rehabilitation to community. To evaluate whether patients performing clean intermittent self-catheterization (CISC) for a short period preferred a prelubricated, hydrophilic, disposable polyvinyl chloride (PVC) catheter or a non-hydrophilic PVC catheter which could be used several times and that had to be lubricated by the patient.
                In a prospective cross-over study, 32 patients used each type of catheter for 3 weeks. After each 3-week period, the patients completed a questionnaire to assess comfort and preference, and urine specimens were obtained for culture.
                There was no significant difference between the groups in the frequency of CISC, discomfort when used, opinion on handling the catheters, preference toward one of the catheters, or of infection.
                Non-hydrophilic PVC catheters may be used safely and with no discomfort to the patient. In addition it may be possible for the healthcare system to save money, as the non-hydrophilic PVC catheters are much cheaper.
Intermittent catheterisation is a critical aspect of healthcare for individuals with incomplete emptying who are otherwise unable to void adequately to protect bladder and renal health. There is a lack of evidence to state that incidence of UTI is affected by use of sterile or clean technique, coated or uncoated catheters, single (sterile) or multiple use (clean) catheters, self-catheterisation or catheterisation by others, or by any other strategy. The current research evidence is weak and design issues are significant. In light of the current climate of infection control and antibiotic resistance, further, well-designed studies are strongly recommended. Based on the current data, it is not possible to state that one catheter type, technique or strategy is better than another.