See the published version of this preprint at BMC Nursing.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Research article
Aysel Kulbay
Karolinska Institutet
Corresponding Author
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: To support a uniform and evidence-based practice for indwelling urinary catheterization in adults The European association of Urology Nurses (EAUN) published guidelines for this procedure in 2012. The Swedish national guidelines are based on the sterility precautions advocated by EAUN. Nevertheless, some hospitals have local guidelines with other requirements concerning sterility and leave to staff to decide what equipment to use and how to perform the catheterization. The aim of this study was to investigate the nurses´ self-reported sterility precautions during indwelling urethral catheterization at two acute-care hospitals, where the local guidelines differ in their sterility requirements. The study also aimed to analyse factors affecting the participants´ conformity with sterility precautions recommended in the EAUN-guidelines.
Methods: A structured questionnaire with questions concerning the participant, working conditions and performance of indwelling urethral catheterization was left to 931 nurses in two acute care hospitals. Chi-square test, Fisher´s exact test and Mann-Whitney U-test were used for descriptive statistics. Logistic regression was used to analyse variables associated with practicing the sterility precautions as recommended in the EAUN-guidelines.
Results: Answers were obtained from 852 persons (91.5 %). A majority of the participants called their insertion technique “non-sterile”. Regardless of what the insertion technique was called, the participants said that the IUC should be kept sterile during procedure. In spite of that not everyone used necessary sterile equipment to maintain the sterility of the catheter. The nurses´ conformity with all the sterility precautions as advocated in the EAUN-guidelines were associated with working at departments for surgery and cardiology (OR 2.50, CI 1.78-3.49) and years in profession (OR 1.54, CI 1.03-2.30). It was also associated with use of sterile set for catheterization (OR 2.03, CI 1.40-2.94), use of sterile drapes for dressing of the insertion area (OR 1.94, CI 1.25-3.00) and using the term “sterile technique” for indwelling urethral catheterization (OR 1.67, CI 1.13-2.47).
Conclusions: To achieve a uniform practice in aseptic urethral catheterization national and local hospital guidelines should advocate same sterility precautions. Evidence-based guidelines should describe how sterility precautions are accomplished and should be implemented in healthcare-settings.
Keywords
rethral catheterization, insertion technique, guidelines, compliance
Figure 1
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Nursing.
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 04 Mar, 2021
Review #1 received
Received 14 Jan, 2021
Review #2 received
Received 04 Jan, 2021
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 14 Dec, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 13 Dec, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 13 Dec, 2020
Editor assigned
On 12 Nov, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 12 Nov, 2020
Editor invited
On 12 Nov, 2020
Version 1
Posted 10 Jun, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 13 Oct, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 28 Sep, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 14 Sep, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 10 Sep, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 20 Aug, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 14 Jul, 2020
Editor assigned
On 03 Jun, 2020
First submitted
On 02 Jun, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 02 Jun, 2020
Editor invited
On 02 Jun, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Nursing
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
See the published version of this preprint at BMC Nursing.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Aysel Kulbay
Karolinska Institutet
Corresponding Author
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Nursing.
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 04 Mar, 2021
Review #1 received
Received 14 Jan, 2021
Review #2 received
Received 04 Jan, 2021
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 14 Dec, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 13 Dec, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 13 Dec, 2020
Editor assigned
On 12 Nov, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 12 Nov, 2020
Editor invited
On 12 Nov, 2020
Version 1
Posted 10 Jun, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 13 Oct, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 28 Sep, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 14 Sep, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 10 Sep, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 20 Aug, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 14 Jul, 2020
Editor assigned
On 03 Jun, 2020
First submitted
On 02 Jun, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 02 Jun, 2020
Editor invited
On 02 Jun, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Nursing
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at BMC Nursing.
Background: To support a uniform and evidence-based practice for indwelling urinary catheterization in adults The European association of Urology Nurses (EAUN) published guidelines for this procedure in 2012. The Swedish national guidelines are based on the sterility precautions advocated by EAUN. Nevertheless, some hospitals have local guidelines with other requirements concerning sterility and leave to staff to decide what equipment to use and how to perform the catheterization. The aim of this study was to investigate the nurses´ self-reported sterility precautions during indwelling urethral catheterization at two acute-care hospitals, where the local guidelines differ in their sterility requirements. The study also aimed to analyse factors affecting the participants´ conformity with sterility precautions recommended in the EAUN-guidelines.
Methods: A structured questionnaire with questions concerning the participant, working conditions and performance of indwelling urethral catheterization was left to 931 nurses in two acute care hospitals. Chi-square test, Fisher´s exact test and Mann-Whitney U-test were used for descriptive statistics. Logistic regression was used to analyse variables associated with practicing the sterility precautions as recommended in the EAUN-guidelines.
Results: Answers were obtained from 852 persons (91.5 %). A majority of the participants called their insertion technique “non-sterile”. Regardless of what the insertion technique was called, the participants said that the IUC should be kept sterile during procedure. In spite of that not everyone used necessary sterile equipment to maintain the sterility of the catheter. The nurses´ conformity with all the sterility precautions as advocated in the EAUN-guidelines were associated with working at departments for surgery and cardiology (OR 2.50, CI 1.78-3.49) and years in profession (OR 1.54, CI 1.03-2.30). It was also associated with use of sterile set for catheterization (OR 2.03, CI 1.40-2.94), use of sterile drapes for dressing of the insertion area (OR 1.94, CI 1.25-3.00) and using the term “sterile technique” for indwelling urethral catheterization (OR 1.67, CI 1.13-2.47).
Conclusions: To achieve a uniform practice in aseptic urethral catheterization national and local hospital guidelines should advocate same sterility precautions. Evidence-based guidelines should describe how sterility precautions are accomplished and should be implemented in healthcare-settings.
Figure 1
Loading...