Implementation of a standardized voiding protocol after minimally invasive surgery: A quality improvement initiative
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of the implementation of a standardized voiding protocol in patients undergoing minimally invasive hysterectomy at a single cancer center in terms of the urinary tract infection (UTI) rate, time to first void, and overnight stays secondary to urinary retention. METHODS: We enrolled 102 consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive hysterectomy at a single cancer center during a 12-month period. A pre-intervention cohort of 100 consecutive patients was identified for comparison. A multidisciplinary team developed and implemented a standardized voiding protocol using quality improvement methodology. We compared the demographics, time to first void, rate of urinary retention, and UTI rates between the pre- and post-intervention cohorts. RESULTS: Our intervention led to a significant reduction in the time to first void (289 min vs. 566 min; P < 0.001), rate of urinary retention (2% vs. 10%; P = 0.015), and postoperative UTI (4% vs. 8%; P = 0.249). There was a similar rate of patients going home with a Foley catheter (9% vs. 11%; P = 0.850). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a standardized voiding protocol was associated with a reduction in rate of UTI, time to first void, and overnight stays secondary to urinary retention.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".