Frequency of intermittent catheterization in patients with spinal cord lesion
Authors:
Roman Zachoval 1; Jan Krhut 2; Miroslav Krhovský 3; Ján Švihra 4
Authors‘ workplace:
Urologické oddělení, Thomayerova nemocnice a Urologická klinika, 1. a 3. LF UK, Praha
1; Urologické oddělení, Fakultní nemocnice Ostrava
2; Urologické oddělení, Nemocnice Kyjov
3; Urologická klinika, Jesseniova lekárská fakulta, Martin, Slovenská republika
4
Published in:
Ces Urol 2018; 22(3): 176-187
Category:
Original Articles
Overview
Major statement:
This comprehensive study of intermittent catheterization regimes in patients with spinal cord injury demonstrated that the majority of patients perform catheterization with a frequency of 6 times a day or more. No difference in frequency of catheterization was observed in different groups of patients divided according to the spinal cord lesion level or gender.
Aim:
The aim of the study was to obtain data about the basic aspects of intermittent catheterization regimes in patients with spinal cord lesions in the Czech Repiblic. The focus was pointed at the frequency of catheterization in the whole group of patients and in different subgroups divided according to the spinal cord lesion level, gender and method of catheterization.
Metods:
All patient performing intermittent catheterization registered in databases in the Czech Republic were addressed with a request for anonymously completing a questionnaire aimed at basic demographic and personal history data, information about the method and frequency of catheterization of the urinary bladder and the impact of intermittent catheterization on quality of life. Data from patients with spinal cord lesion were evaluated: demography, duration and level of spinal cord lesion and frequency of intermittent catheterization per 24 hours in the whole group of patients and in the subgroup of patients divided according to level.
Results:
Completed questionnaires were obtained from 722 out of 856 addressed patients. Data from 349 responders (256 males and 93 females) with spinal cord lesion were used for evaluation. Average age was 46.3 ± 14.5 years. 113 (32.4 %) responders suffered from spinal cord lesion at the cervical level, 59 (16.9 %) at upper thoracic level (T1- T6), 119 (34.1 %) at lower thoracic level (T7-T12), 47 (13.5 %) at lumbar level and 11 (3.1 %) at sacral level. Average duration of the spinal cord lesion was 11.9 ± 10.4 years, average period from the start of the regime of intermittent catheterization was 7.9 ± 5.5 years. 308 (88.3 %) responders performed self‑catheterization, 41 responders were catheterized by aother person. The catheterization performed by aother person was done almost exclusively in patients with cevical spinal cord lesion (97.6 %). Average catheterization frequency in the whole group of patients was 5.7 ± 1.6. No statistically significant difference was observed in the subgroups of patients divided according to the spinal cord lesion level or gender. 181 (51.9 %) patients from the whole group of patients and 170 (55.2 %) patients from the subgroup of patients performing self‑catheterization perform intermittent catheterization 6 times a day or more.
Conclusion:
This comprehensive study of internittent catheterization regimes in patients with spinal cord lesions demonstrated that the majority of patients perform catheterization with a frequency of 6 times a day or more. No difference in frequency of catheterization was observed in different groups of patients divided according to the spinal cord lesion level or gender. The study results are of great importance for both medical care providers and state authorities and insurance companies in the Czech Republic.
KEY WORDS
Intermittent catheterization, spinal cord lesion, survey, Czech Republic.
Sources
1. https://www.spinalcord.cz/cz/statistiky/
2. Krhut J, et al. Neurourologie. Praha: Galen 2005; 49.
3. Svihra J, Krhut J, Zachoval R, Svihrova V, Ľuptak J. Impact of clean intermittent catheterization on quality adjusted years (QALYs) in spinal cord patients with neurogenic urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn 2018; DOI: 10.1002/nau.23283
4. Shamout S, Biardeau X, Corcos J, Campeau L. Outcome comparison of different approaches to self‑ -intermittent catheterization in neurogenic patients: a systematic review. Spinal Cord 2017; 55(7): 629–643.
5. Fumincelli L, Mazzo A, Martins JC, Henriques FM, Cardoso D, Rodrigues MA. Effectiveness of intermittent urinary catheterization in patients with neurogenic bladder: a systematic review protocol. JBI Database Systém Rev Implement Rep 2016; 14(12): 83–91.
6. Kirshblum SC, Waring W, Biering‑Sorensen F, et al. Reference for the 2011 revision of the intermational standards for neurological classification of spinal cord inujry. J Spinal Cord Med 2011; 34(6): 547–554.
7. Guttmann L, Frankel H. The value of intermittent catheterization in the early management of traumatic paraplegia and tetraplegia. Paraplegia 1966; 4(2): 63–84.
8. Lapides C, Diokno AC, Silber SJ, Lowe BS. Clean intermittent self catheterization in the treatment of urinary tract disease. J Urol 1972; 107(3), 458–461.
9. Hanuš T. Intermitentní katetrizace močového měchýře. Čas Lék Čes 1983; 122: 1135-1137.
10. Biardeau X, Corcos J. Intermittent catheterization in neurologic patients: Update on genitourinary tract infection and urethral trauma. Ann Phys Rehabil Med 2016; 59(2): 125–129.
11. http://uroweb.org/guideline/neuro‑urology/
12. Krhut J, Zachoval R, Ženíšek J, Hanuš T, Zámečník L. Intermitentní katetrizace močového měchýře – indikace, techniky, komplikace. Ces Urol 2005; 155(10): 674–677.
13. Hakansson MA. Reuse versus single‑use catheters for intermittent catheterization: what is safe and preffered? Review of current status. Spinal Cord 2014; 52(7): 511–516.
14. Rognoni C, Tarricone R. Intermittent catheterization with hydrophylic and non‑hydrophylic urinary catheters: systematic literature review and meta‑analyses. BMC Urol 2017; 17(1): 4.
15. Li L, Ye W, Ruan H, Yang B, Zhang S, Li L. Impact of hydrophylic catheters on urinary tract infections in people with spinal cord injury: systematic review and meta‑analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2013; 94(4): 782–787.
16. Šámal V, Kyrianová A, Šrám J, Mečl J, Fogl J. Čistá intermitentní katetrizace v léčbě neurogenních dysfunkcí dolních močových cest po spinálním poranění: porovnání výsledků při použití hydrofilních a standradních PVC katétrů. Ces Urol 2011; 15(4): 229–236.
Labels
Paediatric urologist Nephrology UrologyArticle was published in
Czech Urology
2018 Issue 3
Most read in this issue
- Extended recommendation for management of paediatric enuresis
- Impact of stone density and size on the effect of flexible ureterorenoscopy with laser lithotripsy
- Adenocarcinoma of sigmoid bladder augmentation
- Frequency of intermittent catheterization in patients with spinal cord lesion