MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1827721536 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.1068

Glidewire-assisted Foley catheter placement: a simple and safe technique for difficult male catheterization

2013· article· en· W1827721536 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rei K. Chiou, Himanshu Aggarwal, Wen Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFoleySimple (philosophy)Foley catheterMedicineCatheterSurgeryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Difficulty in Foley catheter placement is a frequently encountered problem.We describe a simple and safe technique for this condition.Rather than using force, which may lead to the formation of a false passage, one should place a glidewire into the bladder through the area of resistance, followed by the placement of a Foley catheter over the glidewire.This is a very easy procedure and can be taught to nurses and nurse practitioners to avoid an unnecessary call for a urologist in the emergency department. RésuméIl arrive fréquemment que des difficultés surviennent durant l'installation d'une sonde de Foley.Nous décrivons ici une technique simple et sûre pour remédier à la situation.Plutôt que d'utiliser la force, qui peut entraîner la formation d'un faux passage, nous conseillons d'insérer un fil-guide dans la vessie par la zone de résistance suivi de l'installation de la sonde de Foley par-dessus le fil-guide.Cette intervention est très facile à réaliser et peut être enseignée aux infirmières et aux infirmières praticiennes en cas de difficulté lors de l'insertion de la sonde et ainsi éviter de devoir faire venir un urologue à la salle d'urgence.We describe a simple and safe technique that we have taught to several nurse practitioners, urology nurses and non-urology specialized physicians to successfully place Foley catheters in difficult cases.This technique can help avoid unnecessary emergency department visits for urologists.This technique has been used in more than 150 cases of difficult catheterization without any complications. TechniqueWhen encountering difficulty in placing a Foley catheter in a male patient, one should ensure that the urethra is lubricated adequately.This can be better achieved by instilling lubricants into the urethra rather than solely dipping the tip of the catheter in the lubricant.If the patient experiences substantial pain during a Foley catheter placement, the intraurethral instillation of topical anesthetics (2% xylocaine jelly) is also helpful.This alleviates pain and decreases sphincter contraction that creates resistance to the catheter placement.If, after these manoeuvres, one cannot place the Foley catheter, then a glidewire-assisted technique should be used rather than forcefully pushing the Foley catheter.Examples of such a glidewire are the angled tip, 0.038 inches, 150 cm, No. 630-103 wire (Boston Scientific Inc.) or the straight tip, 0.038 inches, 150 cm, No. HW-038150 Hi-wire (Cook Medical Inc.).Glidewires and Hi-wires are hydrophilic coated smooth surface wires that have very soft ends, which makes it safe to pass through a strictured or distorted urethra with minimal risk of injury.When a hydrophilic glidewire comes in contact with water it becomes slippery and the Foley catheter can easily be slid around it because of its smooth and wet surface.The glidewire comes in different sizes and lengths.We commonly use a 0.038-inch glidewire with 150 cm length for this technique.After moisturizing the glidewire with sterile water by injecting water into the plastic sheath that contains the glidewire and then using a wet sponge to keep the glidewire moist during use, the soft floppy end of the glidewire or Hi-wire (not the stiff end of the wire) should be placed into Can

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association Journal→Same topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→