ArticleJournal of wound, ostomy, and continence nursing : official publication of The Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurses Society
External Collection Devices as an Alternative to the Indwelling Urinary Catheter: Evidence-Based Review and Expert Clinical Panel Deliberations.
Article in Journal of wound, ostomy, and continence nursing : official publication of The Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurses Society. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Comparative Randomized Crossover Pilot Study Comparing Male External Urine Collection Devices in Home Settings.Journal of wound, ostomy, and continence nursing : official publication of The Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurses SocietyTrial
- The estimated economic burden of urinary incontinence-related complications in older adults Canada.The Canadian journal of urology · 2026Review
- Safe and unsafe urinary catheter use in long-term care homes: a human factors-informed scoping review protocol.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Safety, Efficacy, and Patient-Reported Outcomes of the PureWick™ System Versus Comparator for Nocturnal Urinary Incontinence in the Home Setting: Results of a Randomized Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Review
- Article
- Microbial Biofilm: A Review on Formation, Infection, Antibiotic Resistance, Control Measures, and Innovative Treatment.Microorganisms · 2023Review
- Evaluating the incidence of bacteriuria in female patients before and after implementation of external urinary collection devices.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2022Article
- Catheter-associated urinary tract infection reduction in critical care units: a bundled care model.BMJ open quality · 2021Article
- Effect of a Female External Urinary Catheter on Incidence of Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infection.Cureus · 2020Article
- Avoiding inappropriate urinary catheter use and catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI): a pre-post control intervention study.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Urinary Management With an External Female Collection Device.Journal of wound, ostomy, and continence nursing : official publication of The Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurses SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple evidence-based guidelines have suggested clinicians consider external collection devices (ECD) as alternatives to indwelling catheters. Nevertheless, there is a dearth of evidence-based resources concerning their use. An expert consensus panel was convened to review the current state of the evidence, indications for ECDs as an alternative to an indwelling urinary catheter, identify knowledge gaps, and areas for future research. This article presents the results of the expert consensus panel meeting and a systematic literature review regarding ECD use in the clinical setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.