ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2021
Knowledge, skills, and confidence among healthcare staff in urinary catheterization.
Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere is an increasing volume of urology referrals for urinary catheterization (UC). The aim of this study was to determine the confidence and knowledge among healthcare staff on UC. We also assessed their satisfaction with training and support received during catheter education and clinical practice.
methodsThis was a mixed-methods model using an anonymous, online survey circulated among all hospital staff. Weekly reminders were sent, quantitative data was obtained from closed-ended questions, and thematic analysis was performed for qualitative, open-ended questions.
resultsThe response rate was 26% (n=90/350), from a heterogenous group of doctors and nurses from various specialties and grades in the hospital and community frequently dealing with UC. There was decreasing confidence levels in female UC (54%, n=47/87), three-way catheters (33%, n=29/89), and managing suprapubic catheters (25%, n=21/85). Female UC was reported as the most difficult of catheter insertions (35%, n=31/90). Although 83% (n=74/89) of respondents received catheter education, 53% (n=48/90) felt this was insufficient for clinical practice. Fifty-one percent (n=45/89) believed more support with UC in clinical practice was required and 64% (n=57/89) recommended changes in catheter education. The most common theme identified was the need for ongoing education and more practical supervision in clinical practice.
conclusionsCatheter training should focus on different types of catheters and management of difficult catheter scenarios. Standardizing safe catheter education during undergraduate training and including this as a part of regular annual or biannual mandatory training for healthcare staff involved in dealing with catheters in clinical practice would be the way forward.
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.