Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17943874›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2007

Long-term bladder management by intermittent catheterisation in adults and children.

K N Moore, M Fader, K Getliffe

RetractedAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 35 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 140 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. WITHDRAWN: Intermittent catheterisation for long-term bladder management.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Policies for replacing long-term indwelling urinary catheters in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  6. Conservative management for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Urinary catheter policies for long-term bladder drainage.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  10. Absorbent products for light urinary incontinence in women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2007
    Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Clean intermittent catheterization revisited.International urology and nephrology · 2016
    Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

K N MooreUniversity of Alberta, Faculty of Nursing, 3rd Floor, Clinical Sciences Building, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, T6G 2G7. katherine.moore@ualberta.ca
M Fader
K Getliffe
University of Alberta · CAUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntermittent catheterisation (IC) is a commonly recommended procedure for people with incomplete bladder emptying not satisfactorily managed by other methods. The most frequent complication of IC is urinary tract infection (UTI). It is unclear which catheter types, techniques or strategies, affect the incidence of UTI. There is wide variation in practice and important cost implications for using different catheters, techniques or strategies.

objectivesTo compare sterile versus clean catheterisation technique, coated (pre-lubricated) versus uncoated (separate lubricant) catheters, single (sterile) or multiple use (clean) catheters, self-catheterisation versus catheterisation by others, and any other strategies designed to reduce UTIs in respect of incidence of symptomatic UTI, haematuria, other infections and user preference, in adults and children using intermittent catheterisation for incomplete bladder emptying. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Trials Register (searched 19 June 2006), MEDLINE (January 1966 to June 2007), EMBASE (January 1988 to June 2007), CINAHL (January 1982 to June 2007), ERIC (January 1984 to June 2007), the reference lists of relevant articles and conference proceedings, and we attempted to contact other investigators for unpublished data or for clarification. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing at least two different catheterisation techniques, strategies or catheter types. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three reviewers assessed the methodological quality of trials and abstracted data. For dichotomous variables, relative risks and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were derived for each outcome where possible. For continuous variables, mean differences and 95% CI were calculated for each outcome. Because of trial heterogeneity, data were not combined to give an overall estimate of treatment effect. MAIN

resultsFourteen studies met the inclusion criteria; all were small (less than 60 participants). There was considerable variation in length of follow-up and definitions of UTI. Participant drop-out was a problem for several studies. Several studies were more than ten years old and outcome measures varied between studies. Where there were data, confidence intervals around estimates were wide and hence clinically important differences in UTI and other outcomes could neither be identified nor ruled out reliably. AUTHORS'

conclusionsIntermittent 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.

Indexed as

AdultChildEquipment ReuseFemaleHumansMalePatient DropoutsUrinary CatheterizationUrinary RetentionUrinary Tract Infections

Identifiers

PMID17943874
OpenAlexW1840533428

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.