ArticleScientific reports2022
Evaluation of urinary catheters for effective manual bladder washout.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of Open-Ended Urinary Catheters in Preventing Catheter-Related Bladder Discomfort: A Randomized Controlled Trial.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2025Trial
- Proactive Cystoscopic Debris Removal for Reducing Catheter Blockage in Patients with Long-Term Indwelling Catheters: A Prospective Self-Selected Cohort Study with Exploratory Subgroup Analysis on Urinary Tract Infections.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Open-ended urethral catheters reduce catheter obstruction after hypospadias repair.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our purpose was to evaluate the efficiency of manual bladder washout (MBW) for bladder retention by blood clot formation using urinary catheters. Three types of 22 Fr urinary catheters, a rounded tip Foley catheter (FC) with the standard two eyes, an open-ended Nelaton catheter (NC) with a side hole, and an open-ended Foley catheter (OEFC) with a side hole closer to the tip than NC, were evaluated. An automatic irrigation device that could perform a predetermined procedure mimicking MBW under constant velocity was fabricated. The procedure using catheters and the device was performed in a pseudo blood clot or in water. The total area of the holes was the largest in NC followed by FC and OEFC. The predetermined operations using our device revealed that NC needed less force and could effectively remove pseudo clots from the early stage of the operations. Fluid visualization experiments suggested that a closer distance between the tip and the side hole could improve the efficiency of clot removal. In conclusion, the larger the area of the hole in urinary catheter, the less force is required for MBW. Furthermore, the most efficient catheter with two holes for MBW needs to be at least open-ended with a side hole closer to the tip.
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.