MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282916100 · doi:10.1111/jocn.16393

Impact of early postoperative indwelling urinary catheter removal: A systematic review

2022· review· en· W4282916100 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jeanne‐Marie Nollen, Laury Pijnappel, Jan W. Schoones, Wilco C. Peul, Wouter R. van Furth, Anja H. Brunsveld‐Reinders

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Nursing · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Tract Infections Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCochrane LibraryUrinary systemMEDLINESystematic reviewIncidence (geometry)Intensive care medicineRandomized controlled trialEmergency medicineSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Indwelling urinary catheters (IDUCs) are associated with complications and early removal is therefore essential. Currently, it is unknown what the effect of a specific removal time is and what the consequences of this removal time are. RESEARCH QUESTION: To present an overview of the available evidence to determine the effects of three postoperative IDUC removal times (after a certain number of hours, at a specific time of day and flexible removal time) on the development of complications in hospital. METHODS: PubMed, Medline, Embase, Emcare and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched till 6 June, 2021. Studies were included that described the effect of the removal time in relation to re-catheterisation, urinary tract infections (UTIs), ambulation time, time of first voiding and hospital stay. The quality of the studies was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care. A narrative descriptive analysis was performed. PRISMA guidelines were followed in reporting this review. RESULTS: Twenty studies were included from which 18 compared removal after a number of hours, 1 reported on a specific removal time and 1 reported on both topics. The results were contradicting regarding the hypothesis that later removal increases the incidence of UTIs. Earlier removal does not lead to a higher re-catheterisation rate while immediate removal is beneficial for reducing the time to first ambulation and shortening the hospital stay. Studies reporting on specific removal times did not find differences in outcomes. No study addressed flexible removal time. CONCLUSIONS: There is inconclusive evidence that earlier removal results in less UTIs, despite the incidence of UTIs increasing if the IDUC is removed ≥24 h. Immediate or after 1-2 day(s) removal does not lead to higher re-catheterisation rates while immediate removal results in earlier ambulation and shorter length of hospital stay. IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Nurses should focus on early IDUC removal while being aware of 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.006
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.147
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations27
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical NursingSame topicUrinary Tract Infections ManagementFrench-language works237,207