Self‐Care Activities of Community‐Residing Adults With Indwelling Urinary Catheters: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To map self-care activities related to indwelling urinary catheters in community-residing adults. DESIGN: Scoping review guided by Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches of electronic databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase) and targeted grey literature search were conducted for documents published between 2000 and October 2023. METHODS: Documents describing self-care activities and the management of catheter-related complications in community-residing adults (aged ≥ 18 years) were included. Three independent reviewers used Covidence to screen titles and abstracts and full-text articles, appraise the quality of the literature, and extract data. Directed content analysis of the extracted data was conducted, informed by the mid-range theory of self-care of chronic illness, and summarised narratively. RESULTS: A total of 32 documents were included; nine qualitative studies, eight expert opinions, six quantitative studies, five guidelines, two quality improvement projects, and two reviews. The majority (81.3%) of the documents were concerned with the prevention and management of catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI; n = 26). Many self-care activities were reported across the self-care processes of maintenance, monitoring, and management. Maintaining the catheter and drainage system, and self-care education topics related to maintaining the catheter were the most cited (n = 17 [53.1%] and n = 20 [62.5%], respectively). Less emphasis was given to management self-care activities, such as seeking support from clinicians (n = 13, 40.6%). CONCLUSION: The scoping review findings provide a greater understanding of how persons with indwelling catheters maintain and monitor their catheters and highlight that much less is known about how they manage situations when complications arise. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: The findings can guide the design of community care programmes and serve as a basis for developing patient self-care education resources. These findings should be consolidated and examined by nursing researchers, clinicians, and persons with lived experience to provide holistic guidance on self-care of indwelling catheters and associated complications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".