Melike Durukan, Ayşe Akbıyık, Selçuk Kaya, Murat Aksun
{"title":"Microbial Colonization and Associated Factors in Indwelling Urinary Catheters: A Cross-Sectional Study.","authors":"Melike Durukan, Ayşe Akbıyık, Selçuk Kaya, Murat Aksun","doi":"10.1002/nur.22454","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to determine microbial colonization in indwelling urinary catheters (UCs) and identify patient-specific risk factors associated with this colonization. This cross-sectional study involved 61 hospitalized intensive care unit patients with indwelling UCs. Bacterial colonization and susceptibility were assessed in the indwelling UCs from the second day onwards following urinary catheterization. The average duration of catheterization was 13.62 ± 13.72 days. Colonization of 10⁵ CFU/mL and above was determined in all indwelling UCs from the second day of catheterization onwards. The catheter was colonized by the following microorganism species: Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii, Proteus mirabilis, and Staphylococcus aureus. 47.9% of clinical isolates showed multi-drug resistance (MDR). Clinical isolates did not show significant differences based on patient variables such as age, Body Mass Index, and duration of urinary catheterization (p > 0.05). There was a weak correlation (rs:≤ 0.206; p > 0.05) between the species of clinical isolates and patient laboratory variables. Colonization was determined in all indwelling UCs, with nearly half of isolates exhibiting MDR. These findings highlight the urgent need for improved strategies to manage and prevent catheter-associated infections, particularly in high-risk patient populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":54492,"journal":{"name":"Research in Nursing & Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Nursing & Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.22454","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study aimed to determine microbial colonization in indwelling urinary catheters (UCs) and identify patient-specific risk factors associated with this colonization. This cross-sectional study involved 61 hospitalized intensive care unit patients with indwelling UCs. Bacterial colonization and susceptibility were assessed in the indwelling UCs from the second day onwards following urinary catheterization. The average duration of catheterization was 13.62 ± 13.72 days. Colonization of 10⁵ CFU/mL and above was determined in all indwelling UCs from the second day of catheterization onwards. The catheter was colonized by the following microorganism species: Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii, Proteus mirabilis, and Staphylococcus aureus. 47.9% of clinical isolates showed multi-drug resistance (MDR). Clinical isolates did not show significant differences based on patient variables such as age, Body Mass Index, and duration of urinary catheterization (p > 0.05). There was a weak correlation (rs:≤ 0.206; p > 0.05) between the species of clinical isolates and patient laboratory variables. Colonization was determined in all indwelling UCs, with nearly half of isolates exhibiting MDR. These findings highlight the urgent need for improved strategies to manage and prevent catheter-associated infections, particularly in high-risk patient populations.
期刊介绍:
Research in Nursing & Health ( RINAH ) is a peer-reviewed general research journal devoted to publication of a wide range of research that will inform the practice of nursing and other health disciplines. The editors invite reports of research describing problems and testing interventions related to health phenomena, health care and self-care, clinical organization and administration; and the testing of research findings in practice. Research protocols are considered if funded in a peer-reviewed process by an agency external to the authors’ home institution and if the work is in progress. Papers on research methods and techniques are appropriate if they go beyond what is already generally available in the literature and include description of successful use of the method. Theory papers are accepted if each proposition is supported by research evidence. Systematic reviews of the literature are reviewed if PRISMA guidelines are followed. Letters to the editor commenting on published articles are welcome.