A less invasive catheterization protocol for managing urinary retention in patients undergoing hip and knee arthroplasty: A prospective cohort study

Keetie Kremers-van de Hei , Bob Evers , Lotte Weijers , Diederick Duijvesz , Berend Willem Schreurs , Sander Koeter
{"title":"A less invasive catheterization protocol for managing urinary retention in patients undergoing hip and knee arthroplasty: A prospective cohort study","authors":"Keetie Kremers-van de Hei ,&nbsp;Bob Evers ,&nbsp;Lotte Weijers ,&nbsp;Diederick Duijvesz ,&nbsp;Berend Willem Schreurs ,&nbsp;Sander Koeter","doi":"10.1016/j.ijotn.2025.101172","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Postoperative urinary retention is a frequently seen serious complication after surgery. After orthopaedic hip or knee arthroplasty the incidence is relatively high, between 30 and 50% in previous studies. Currently, there is no consensus on the indication for urinary catheterization and a uniform guideline is lacking. This prospective cohort study examined the safety of a modified catheterization protocol with a catheterization threshold of 800 ml instead of 400 ml (usual care) after elective joint arthroplasty using ultrasound bladder scans. The hypothesis was that the incidence of catheterization will be reduced without increasing urinary complications.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>We prospectively included 305 patients who were treated according to the local fast track arthroplasty protocol in which a modified catheterization protocol was used. Catheterization was only performed at a scan volume of 800 ml or more. Bladder contents were monitored preoperatively, immediately postoperatively and at outpatient follow-up. Urological scores and complications were monitored. The usual care control group was treated according to the usual care protocol with a threshold for catheterization of 400 ml, these results were published in a previous study.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The incidence of catheterization for urinary retention was significantly lower in patients who were treated with the less invasive protocol than the usual care control group (11.1% versus 48.8%, p &lt; 0.001). The rate of urologic complications was low using the new protocol (4% urinary tract infection and 0.3% pharmacological interventions).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The results of our study provide strong empirical support for modifying catheterization protocols after orthopaedic surgery. A less invasive protocol is safe, provides reduction in workload for nurses, is patient-friendly and reduces costs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":45099,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Orthopaedic and Trauma Nursing","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 101172"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Orthopaedic and Trauma Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878124125000164","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Postoperative urinary retention is a frequently seen serious complication after surgery. After orthopaedic hip or knee arthroplasty the incidence is relatively high, between 30 and 50% in previous studies. Currently, there is no consensus on the indication for urinary catheterization and a uniform guideline is lacking. This prospective cohort study examined the safety of a modified catheterization protocol with a catheterization threshold of 800 ml instead of 400 ml (usual care) after elective joint arthroplasty using ultrasound bladder scans. The hypothesis was that the incidence of catheterization will be reduced without increasing urinary complications.

Method

We prospectively included 305 patients who were treated according to the local fast track arthroplasty protocol in which a modified catheterization protocol was used. Catheterization was only performed at a scan volume of 800 ml or more. Bladder contents were monitored preoperatively, immediately postoperatively and at outpatient follow-up. Urological scores and complications were monitored. The usual care control group was treated according to the usual care protocol with a threshold for catheterization of 400 ml, these results were published in a previous study.

Results

The incidence of catheterization for urinary retention was significantly lower in patients who were treated with the less invasive protocol than the usual care control group (11.1% versus 48.8%, p < 0.001). The rate of urologic complications was low using the new protocol (4% urinary tract infection and 0.3% pharmacological interventions).

Conclusion

The results of our study provide strong empirical support for modifying catheterization protocols after orthopaedic surgery. A less invasive protocol is safe, provides reduction in workload for nurses, is patient-friendly and reduces costs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
34
期刊最新文献
A less invasive catheterization protocol for managing urinary retention in patients undergoing hip and knee arthroplasty: A prospective cohort study The transition of young people to adult services within orthopaedic healthcare -Editorial for May 2025 issue Efficacy of an Iranian herbal medicine formula for postoperative constipation in trauma patients with hip and lower limb fractures: A triple-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial LITERATURE REVIEWS – Skin traction in orthopaedic care: Efficacy, management and clinical practices across the life course Discharge transition experience and nursing needs of elderly patients with hip fracture: A qualitative systematic review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1