ReviewTherapeutic advances in urology
Quality of life aspects of intermittent catheterization in neurogenic and non-neurogenic patients: a systematic review on heterogeneity in the measurements used.
Review 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.
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) is the golden standard in patients with lower urinary tract dysfunction, leading to bladder emptying problems, due to neurogenic or non-neurogenic causes. CIC affects patient Quality of Life (QoL) both positively and negatively. Objectives: The aim of this systematic review is to determine which measurements are used to report on the QoL of patients who are on CIC in the currently available literature, to determine the overall QoL of patients who are on CIC and lastly, to determine whether QoL in patients who are on CIC is dependent on the underlying cause (neurogenic vs non-neurogenic). Design: This systematic review was conducted following the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Data sources and methods: The Embase, Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane CENTRAL register of trials databases were systematically searched for relevant publications until March 2023. Results: A total of 4430 abstracts were screened and 43 studies were included. Studies were published between 1993 and 2022 and consisted of only neurogenic patients in 22 studies, the others included a mixed population. The included patient populations and the used measurements/tools were heterogeneous. There were 21 measurements/tools used to measure QoL, of which 3 were not validated. One questionnaire was developed to measure QoL in patients on CIC (intermittent self-catheterization questionnaire). Other measurements were suitable for general health-related QoL, to evaluate neurogenic bladder symptoms or incontinence oriented. Conclusion: The 43 included studies showed a great variety of used tools to measure QoL in patients on CIC due to neurogenic and non-neurogenic causes. Because of lacking uniformity of the measured aspects of QoL, the different included studies could not be compared and subgroup analysis was not performed. Recommendations for future research and practice are provided. Trial registration: This systematic review was registered and published beforehand at Prospero (CRD42020181777; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero).
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.