ArticleThe Journal of surgical research2016
Resident performance in complex simulated urinary catheter scenarios.
Article in The Journal of surgical research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUrinary catheter insertion is a common procedure performed in hospitals. Improper catheterization can lead to unnecessary catheter-associated urinary tract infections and urethral trauma, increasing patient morbidity. To prevent such complications, guidelines were created on how to insert and troubleshoot urinary catheters. As nurses have an increasing responsibility for catheter placement, resident responsibility has shifted to more complex scenarios. This study examines the clinical decision-making skills of surgical residents during simulated urinary catheter scenarios. We hypothesize that during urinary catheterization, residents will make inconsistent decisions relating to catheter choices and clinical presentations.
methodsForty-five general surgery residents (postgraduate year 2-4) in Midwest training programs were presented with three of four urinary catheter scenarios of varying difficulty. Residents were allowed 15 min to complete the scenarios with five different urinary catheter choices. A chi-square test was performed to examine the relation between initial and subsequent catheter choices and to evaluate for consistency of decision-making for each scenario.
resultsEighty-two percent of residents performed scenario A; 49% performed scenario B; 64% performed scenario C, and 82% performed scenario D. For initial attempt for scenario A-C, the 16 French Foley catheter was the most common choice (38%, 54%, 50%, P's < 0.001), whereas for scenario D, the 16 French Coude was the most common choice (37%, P < 0.01). Residents were most likely to be successful in achieving urine output in the initial catheterization attempt (P < 0.001). Chi-square analyses showed no relationship between residents' first and subsequent catheter choices for each scenario (P's > 0.05).
conclusionsEvaluation of clinical decision-making shows that initial catheter choice may have been deliberate based on patient background, as evidenced by the most popular choice in scenario D. Analyses of subsequent choices in each of the catheterization models reveal inconsistency. These findings suggest a possible lack of competence or training in clinical decision-making with regard to urinary catheter choices in residents.
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.