ArticleTherapeutic advances in urology
Variation of diagnosis and treatment of catheter-associated urinary tract infections: an online survey among caretakers involved.
Article in Therapeutic advances in urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decision-Making Process of Healthcare Providers Regarding Catheterization Method: A Nationwide Survey Study.Neurourology and urodynamics · 2026Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The diagnosis of a clinically significant catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) in patients performing clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) or with an indwelling catheter (IC) can be challenging. Objective: To get an insight into the variation of the used definition, diagnosis and management of CAUTIs by relevant healthcare workers in the Netherlands. Design: An online clinical scenario-based survey. Methods: The survey was built in Limesurvey and distributed to healthcare workers from randomly selected urology departments, rehabilitation departments/centres and general practice offices between January and May 2022. Questions regarding their field of experience, management strategies, used guidelines and two hypothetical cases with clinical scenarios of a possible CAUTI were included. Results: A total of 172 individuals participated, of which 112 completed the survey. In all, 32 individuals who completed the survey partially were also included. Participants consisted of 68 [44 urologists, 22 rehabilitation doctors (RDs) and 2 general practitioners (GPs)] doctors, 60 nurses (46 from the urology department and 14 from rehabilitation centres/departments) and 16 medical assistants (13 from urology department and 3 from GP offices). The majority consulted patients with an IC or on CIC on a daily/weekly or monthly basis. In all, 35 urologists (79.5%), 9 RDs (40.9%), 21 (45.7%) nurses in the urology department and 6 (42.9%) nurses from a rehabilitation department/centre indicated bladder irrigation as a treatment option for prevention/treatment of CAUTIs, treatment of symptoms or treatment of blockage of the catheter. In the clinical scenarios presented, treatment discrepancies were seen between subspecialties and healthcare workers. Various guidelines were named for the definition of CAUTIs. Conclusion: A considerable variation in diagnoses and management of CAUTIs between the healthcare workers involved was seen. Uniformity in diagnosing and managing CAUTIs, to prevent overtreatment and possible resistance to antibiotics, is advised. Suitable multidisciplinary guidelines are preferred.
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.