Translational andrology and urology · 2019
Comparative study of wire-integrated urethral catheter versus wire-assisted urethral catheter in difficult male urethral catheterization: a single-center experience.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
He Peng, Song Siji, Chen Zhipeng, Liu Yang, Zhou Zhansong, Wang Yongquan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This study reports the clinical experience of the wire-integrated urethral catheter (WIUC) versus wire-assisted urethral catheter (WAUC) in difficult male urethral catheterization.
METHODS: The clinical data of 116 male patients undergoing urinary catheterization with WIUC or WAUC after a failed attempt catheterization in Southwest Hospital from June 2018 to June 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The time spent during urinary catheterization, cost of consumables, experience rating of catheterization methods and materials assessed by medical staff were compared between WIUC group (n=58) and WAUC group (n=58).
RESULTS: The catheterization succeeded in all 116 patients. The time spent of urinary catheterization was (4.0±1.6) min in WIUC group and (15.4±3.3) min in WAUC group, and the cost of consumables was￥400 in WIUC group and￥706.2 in WAUC group. The medical staff's experience rating results were 9.0±0.8 vs. 7.8±0.7 for the catheterization method and 9.3±0.8 vs. 8.0±0.7 for the materials, respectively, in the WIUC group and WAUC group.
CONCLUSIONS: WIUC is reasonably designed and easy to operate and can be used for a variety of clinical situations.
METHODS: The clinical data of 116 male patients undergoing urinary catheterization with WIUC or WAUC after a failed attempt catheterization in Southwest Hospital from June 2018 to June 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The time spent during urinary catheterization, cost of consumables, experience rating of catheterization methods and materials assessed by medical staff were compared between WIUC group (n=58) and WAUC group (n=58).
RESULTS: The catheterization succeeded in all 116 patients. The time spent of urinary catheterization was (4.0±1.6) min in WIUC group and (15.4±3.3) min in WAUC group, and the cost of consumables was￥400 in WIUC group and￥706.2 in WAUC group. The medical staff's experience rating results were 9.0±0.8 vs. 7.8±0.7 for the catheterization method and 9.3±0.8 vs. 8.0±0.7 for the materials, respectively, in the WIUC group and WAUC group.
CONCLUSIONS: WIUC is reasonably designed and easy to operate and can be used for a variety of clinical situations.