Trial reportBMC urology2026
The efficacy of super-lubricous Foley catheters in indwelling catheterization: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
objectiveThis randomized controlled trial evaluated the clinical efficacy of super-lubricous Foley catheters in reducing urethral complications during indwelling catheterization. Focusing on addressing friction-induced injuries, the study assessed four outcomes: 1) urethral adverse reactions; 2) urethral trauma and inflammatory responses; 3) patient comfort; and 4) post-removal voiding symptoms.
methodsA total of 114 patients from a tertiary hospital (December 2023-June 2024) were randomly allocated into two arms: 57 individuals in the experimental arm were treated with super-lubricous Foley catheters, whereas the same number in the control arm received conventional catheters. Primary outcomes included bladder irritation and urethral pain. Secondary outcomes encompassed urethral injury (red blood cells and epithelial cells), inflammation (white blood cells), comfort metrics (activity restriction, sleep disturbance, anxiety), and voiding parameters (dysuria, urinary hesitation, incomplete bladder emptying and lower abdominal pain).
resultsThe baseline data revealed no statistically meaningful differences between the two groups. (all P > 0.05). The experimental group demonstrated significantly lower overall rates of bladder irritation (31.6% vs. 50.9%, P < 0.05) and urethral pain during catheterization (14.0% vs. 31.6%, P < 0.05). Notably, urinary epithelial cells (median 6 vs. 13.5/HP) and leukocytes (31 vs. 81/μL) were reduced in the experimental group (P < 0.05). Activity restriction rates decreased significantly (42.1% vs. 68.4%, P < 0.05), and first void volume improved (200 vs. 150 mL, P < 0.05). There were no meaningful differences between groups in the occurrence of the four urination-related symptoms-including dysuria, urinary hesitation, incomplete bladder emptying, and lower abdominal pain (all P > 0.05).
conclusionSuper-lubricous Foley catheters effectively mitigate bladder irritation, urethral trauma, and inflammation while enhancing patient mobility. However, they show limited efficacy in alleviating post-removal voiding dysfunction. These findings support the clinical adoption of super-lubricous Foley catheters for reducing catheterization-related complications.
trial registrationThis study was a randomized controlled trial registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2300078483, https://www.chictr.org.cn/ ) on 11 December 2023.
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.