Coated catheters for intermittent catheterization: smooth or sticky?
Fader, M., Moore, K.N., Cottenden, A.M., Pettersson, L., Brooks, R. and Malone-Lee, J. (2001) Coated catheters for intermittent catheterization: smooth or sticky? BJU International, 88, (4), 373-377. (doi:10.1046/j.1464-410X.2001.02342.x).
Full text not available from this repository.
Objective: To evaluate the current range of hydrophilic-coated catheters for intermittent self-catheterization, focusing on the adherence of the catheter to the urethral mucosa at the end of catheterization.
Subjects and methods: In a prospective randomized study, 61 community-based men tested each of four different hydrophilic-coated catheters available in the UK at the time. Subjects used each of the four test catheters for 1 week in a random order, and were provided with the number and size of catheter they normally used. To assess the products, the subjects: (i) timed seven catheterizations using a stop-watch to determine the time taken from extracting the catheter from the water-filled package, to removing the catheter from the penis, having emptied the bladder; (ii) recorded the severity of 'sticking' on catheter removal on a three-point scale (not at all, a little, a lot); and (iii) completed a product-performance questionnaire.
Results: There were no significant differences in ratings of 'sticking' between the 'Easicath' and 'Lofric' (P > 0.05), but there were significant differences between these two products and the 'Aquacath' and the 'Silky', which were found to 'stick' more (P < 0.001). The 'Silky' was reported to stick significantly more than the 'Aquacath' (P < 0.001).
Conclusions: Adherence to the urethral mucosa on catheter removal was a common problem, occurring with all catheters, but two products were significantly more likely to stick than the other two. The clinical importance of 'sticking' and the long-term implications are currently unknown. The relative 'sticking' of uncoated catheters has also not been established.
|Digital Object Identifier (DOI):||doi:10.1046/j.1464-410X.2001.02342.x|
|Keywords:||intermittent catheterization, product evaluation, urinary incontinence, catheters,|
|Subjects:||R Medicine > RT Nursing|
|Divisions:||University Structure - Pre August 2011 > Superseded (SONM) > Superseded (LCHN)
|Date Deposited:||01 Feb 2006|
|Last Modified:||06 Aug 2015 02:18|
|RDF:||RDF+N-Triples, RDF+N3, RDF+XML, Browse.|
Actions (login required)