Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25707618›Full record

ArticleDer Urologe. Ausg. A2015

[Nation-wide questionnaire of cathether use in Germany].

F C von Rundstedt, S Roth, S Degener, D Lazica, A Schroeder, M J Mathers

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

F C von RundstedtKlinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Helios Klinikum Wuppertal, Universität Witten-Herdecke, Heusner Straße 40, 42283, Wuppertal, Deutschland, fvonrundstedt@googlemail.com.
S Roth
S Degener
D Lazica
A Schroeder
M J Mathers

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the costs that the national health care system faces with regard to treatment of urinary incontinence and related use of urinary catheters, only limited research has been focused on the subject. In collaboration with the German Association of Urologists, we conducted an online-based survey to learn more about the use of urinary catheters and the care of patients in the outpatient setting.

methodsA comprehensive online survey consisting of 26 questions was sent to all members of the "German Federation of Urologists" (Berufsverband der Deutschen Urologen) in an e-mail. The participation was anonymous and participants were able to complete the survey only once. Data analysis was carried out by the survey provider.

resultsOf the 1407 urologists to whom the survey was sent, 482 answered the survey and 406 (84%) responded to all the questions. According to the survey the replacement of urinary catheters is most commonly carried out by the urologist (59%). The replacement of a catheter is usually performed in the urologists' office (59%). In an emergency setting, patients with an obstructed or displaced catheter are most likely to be taken to the nearest hospital where qualified personnel are on duty and can assist. For long-term urinary drainage in male patients, the suprapubic catheter is the primary choice (61%). In female patients, suprapubic and transurethral catheters are more evenly distributed (36% vs. 31%).

conclusionThe response rate of 34% to the survey indicates that there is an interest in this topic. The results of the survey suggest that patient care involving a urinary catheter in Germany is subject to heterogeneous indications and standards of care. The management of patients with urinary catheters continues to be a responsibility of the urologist.

Indexed as

Age DistributionAmbulatory CareFemaleGermanyHumansMalePatient PreferencePractice Patterns, Physicians'PrevalenceSex DistributionSurveys and QuestionnairesUrinary CathetersUrinary IncontinenceUtilization Review

Identifiers

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.