ArticleInternational journal of surgery protocols2021
RETention of urine After INguinal hernia Elective Repair (RETAINER study I and II).
Article in International journal of surgery protocols, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05969145 (The Effect of Hot-Cold Application to the Bladder After Orthopedic Surgery on Postoperative Urinary Retention), which is not on this 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.
The Effect of Hot-Cold Application to the Bladder After Orthopedic Surgery on Postoperative Urinary Retention
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acute Delirium Post-inguinal Hernia Mesh Repair in a 40-Year-Old Male: An Unusual Case of Cystocerebral Syndrome.Cureus · 2023Article
- Collaboration is the new competition: developing sustainable international collaborative research delivered by a National Surgical Trainee Collaborative Group.ANZ journal of surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePost-operative urinary retention (POUR) is a well-recognised complication of inguinal hernia repair (IHR). The magnitude of the problem is unclear, and contradictory evidence surrounds postulated risk factors. POUR risks patient distress, catheter-complications and a financial and logistical burden to services. Separately, in the field of IHR, there has been a lack of research into patients' perceptions of surgical 'success'. Our aim is to perform a two-phase, multi-centre prospective study to:Assess the rate, risk factors and impact related to POUR post IH repair.Develop and validate a patient reported outcome measure (PROM) for inguinal hernia repair.
methodsRETAINER I: We propose a 24-week prospective study with voluntary international participation in 4 week blocks. All patients undergoing elective IH repair (minimally-invasive/open) will be eligible. Standardised data collection will include patient and perioperative factors. Primary outcome will be development of POUR, defined as the need for insertion of a urinary catheter as determined by the treating clinician. Secondary outcomes will be identification of factors predisposing to POUR and the impact of POUR.RETAINER II: A patient reported outcome measure will be developed using representative patient focus groups for item generation, from which an initial questionnaire will be developed and piloted. Validity, reliability, sensitivity and reproducibility will be assessed using the QQ-10 and standard psychometric methodology.
conclusionsUsing an international multicentre collaborative approach will produce the necessary volume of patients, whilst capturing inter-centre variability, to accurately reflect POUR rates and allow analysis of risk factors. This patient pool will provide an excellent opportunity to develop a PROM using appropriate qualitative methodology. HIGHLIGHTS RETAINER I & II PROTOCOLS: RETAINER (RETention of urine After INguinal hernia Elective Repair) I is a prospective, multicentre, international observational study.RETAINER I aims to explore the
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.