title: Urethral catheters: can we reduce use?
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Indwelling urinary catheters are the main cause of healthcare-associated urinary tract infections. It can be expected that reduction of the use of urinary catheters will lead to decreased numbers of urinary tract infection.
  
  
  METHODS
  The efficacy of an intervention programme to improve adherence to recommendations to reduce the use of urethral catheters was studied in a before-after comparison in ten Dutch hospitals. The programme detected barriers and facilitators and each individual facility was supported with developing their own intervention strategy. Outcome was evaluated by the prevalence of catheters, alternatives such as diapers, numbers of urinary tract infections, the percentage of correct indications and the duration of catheterization. The costs of the implementation as well as the catheterization were evaluated.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Of a population of 16,495 hospitalized patients 3335 patients of whom 2943 were evaluable for the study, had a urethral catheter. The prevalence of urethral catheters decreased insignificantly in neurology (OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.77 - 1.13) and internal medicine wards (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.83 - 1.13), decreased significantly in surgical wards (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.75 - 0.96), but increased significantly in intensive care (IC) and coronary care (CC) units (OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.01 - 2.17). The use of alternatives was limited and remained so after the intervention. Duration of catheterization decreased insignificantly in IC/CC units (ratio after/before 0.95; 95% CI 0.78 - 1.16) and neurology (ratio 0.97; 95% CI 0.80 - 1.18) and significantly in internal medicine (ratio 0.81; 95% CI 0.69 - 0.96) and surgery wards (ratio 0.80; 95% CI 0.71 - 0.90). The percentage of correct indications on the day of inclusion increased from 50 to 67% (p < 0.0001). The prevalence of urinary tract infections in catheterized patients did not change. The mean cost saved per 100 patients was € 537.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Targeted implementation of recommendations from an existing guideline can lead to better adherence and cost savings. Especially, hospitals which use a lot of urethral catheters or where catheterization is prolonged, can expect important improvements.
authors: Leiden University Medical Centre, Department of Infectious Diseases, Leiden, The Netherlands. p.j.van_den_broek@lumc.nl
authors: Pieter J
authors: PJ
authors: van den Broek
authors: Jan C
authors: JC
authors: Wille
authors: Birgit H B
authors: BH
authors: van Benthem
authors: Rom J M
authors: RJ
authors: Perenboom
authors: M Elske
authors: ME
authors: van den Akker-van Marle
authors: Barbara S
authors: BS
authors: Niël-Weise
references: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2001 Oct;22(10):647-9
references: 11776352
references: Arch Intern Med. 1995 Jul 10;155(13):1425-9
references: 7794092
references: J Gen Intern Med. 2008 Jun;23(6):816-20
references: 18421507
references: J Urol. 1962 Mar;87:487-90
references: 13885667
references: Am J Infect Control. 2004 Jun;32(4):196-9
references: 15175612
references: J Hosp Infect. 2007 Nov;67(3):253-7
references: 17949851
references: Clin Perform Qual Health Care. 1998 Jul-Sep;6(3):99-102
references: 10182561
references: Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2005 Aug;31(8):455-62
references: 16156193
references: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2004 Nov;25(11):974-8
references: 15566033
references: N Engl J Med. 1966 May 26;274(21):1155-61
references: 5934951
references: Am J Med Qual. 2005 May-Jun;20(3):121-6
references: 15951517