Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40511269›Full record

ArticleEthiopian journal of health sciences2025

Adhesion Study of

Yogesh B Bele, Prashant V Thakare, Niraj A Ghanwate

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ethiopian journal of health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yogesh B BeleDepartment of Microbiology, Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University, Amravati, Maharashtra, 444602, India.
Prashant V ThakareDepartment of Biotechnology, Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University, Amravati, Maharashtra, 444602, India.
Niraj A GhanwateDepartment of Microbiology, Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University, Amravati, Maharashtra, 444602, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Foley catheters, composed of various materials, can affect bacterial contamination, adhesion, and subsequent biofilm formation. Biofilm formation by Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a major virulence factor. As catheterization duration increases, so does the risk of contamination and biofilm adhesion. The aim of this study was to investigate bacterial adherence to different Foley urinary catheter materials. Methods: A total of 300 used urinary catheters were analyzed for bacterial contamination. The bacteria isolated from these catheters were studied for biofilm formation using the tissue culture plate method. Sections of new Foley catheters made of latex, polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and silicone were exposed to a high biofilm-forming strain of P. aeruginosa to determine which material was more susceptible to bacterial attachment and biofilm formation. The surface morphology of the catheter materials was analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Results: Of the 300 urinary catheters, 270 were contaminated with various uropathogens. A latex Foley catheter became contaminated with P. aeruginosa at 72 hours, while PVC and silicone catheters were infected at 120 hours. SEM analysis revealed biofilm formation on the catheter surfaces. Conclusions: Among the contaminated catheters, 49% contained P. aeruginosa, forming a consistent biofilm. Latex catheters were more susceptible to early infection compared to PVC and silicone.

Indexed as

Bacterial AdhesionBiofilmsEquipment ContaminationPseudomonas aeruginosaUrinary CatheterizationUrinary CathetersCatheter-Related InfectionsHumansLatexMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningPolyvinyl ChloridePseudomonas InfectionsSiliconesLatexPolyvinyl ChlorideSiliconesAdherencebiofilmcatheter materialsPseudomonas aeruginosascanning electron microscopy

Identifiers

PMID40511269
PMCPMC12153063

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.