Clamping Catheter Versus Free Drainage for Patients With Neurogenic Bladder With Indwelling Urinary Catheter: A Meta-Analysis

Le résumé fourni par la source

Background: In the clinical setting, individuals with neurogenic bladder dysfunction commonly utilize indwelling urinary catheters for urinary management. The comparative efficacy of catheter clamping versus continuous free drainage in this patient population is yet to be established. This meta-analysis aims to explore the efficacy and safety of catheter clamping versus natural drainage in patients with neurogenic bladder, to provide evidence to support the treatment and nursing care of these patients. Methods: Two researchers conducted a literature search in Clinicaltrials et al. databases for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) comparing clamping of the catheter to free drainage in patients with neurogenic bladder who have indwelling urinary catheters. The RCT bias risk assessment tool recommended by the Cochrane Handbook was used for quality assessment. RevMan 5.3 software were used for meta-analysis. Results: A total of 8 RCTs involving 772 patients with neurogenic bladder were enrolled. Catheter clamping significantly increased the volume of first urination in patients [MD = 52.86, 95%CI (42.30, 63.41), p < .001]. The difference in time to first urination [SMD = 0.10, 95%CI (−0.68, 0.89), p = .80], residual urine volume [MD = −5.18, 95%CI (−17.27, 6.90), p = .40], incidence of urinary retention [MD = 1.07, 95%CI (0.30, 3.87), p = .92], the incidence of urinary tract infection [RR = 1.38, 95%CI (0.64, 2.97), p = .42] between the catheter clamping group and the natural drainage group were not statistically significant. The results of Egger’s regression analysis indicated no evidence of statistical publication bias. Conclusion: In light of the existing body of evidence, the routine practice of catheter clamping in catheterized patients with neurogenic bladder is not recommended.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.