脊髓损伤后患者对清洁间歇自我导尿的依从性

R. V. Salyukov, A. N. Riger, M. V. Frolova, G. E. Ivanova
{"title":"脊髓损伤后患者对清洁间歇自我导尿的依从性","authors":"R. V. Salyukov, A. N. Riger, M. V. Frolova, G. E. Ivanova","doi":"10.21886/2308-6424-2023-11-3-131-141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Clean intermittent self-catheterisation (CISC) was for many years considered the most preferable method to drain the bladder in patients with lower urinary tract disfunction. However, concerning long-term CISC, the adherence rate to the method was limited due to complications, psychological barriers, physical disabilities and social disadaptation. According to results of last studies hydrophilic catheters decrease the prevalence of recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs) and urethral trauma. Thereby patients with voiding difficulties after spinal cord injury (SCI) could gain a better quality of life and acceptance of CISC. New coated catheters improved self-catheterisation techniques, personalised management, and better access to help and advice reduced the frequency of side effects. Furthermore, the percentage of unsatisfied patients who rejected the method fell. Consequently, CICS remains the most useable clean technique to drain the bladder regarding neuro-urological patients. Most of physicians have already admitted, that CICS seems to be a safe and easy-to-learn method. In this review we aimed to analyze all pros and cons of CICS relating to patients with lower urinary tract dysfunction after SCI.","PeriodicalId":490070,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik urologii","volume":"70 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Compliance of patients to clean intermittent self-catheterization after spinal cord injury\",\"authors\":\"R. V. Salyukov, A. N. Riger, M. V. Frolova, G. E. Ivanova\",\"doi\":\"10.21886/2308-6424-2023-11-3-131-141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Clean intermittent self-catheterisation (CISC) was for many years considered the most preferable method to drain the bladder in patients with lower urinary tract disfunction. However, concerning long-term CISC, the adherence rate to the method was limited due to complications, psychological barriers, physical disabilities and social disadaptation. According to results of last studies hydrophilic catheters decrease the prevalence of recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs) and urethral trauma. Thereby patients with voiding difficulties after spinal cord injury (SCI) could gain a better quality of life and acceptance of CISC. New coated catheters improved self-catheterisation techniques, personalised management, and better access to help and advice reduced the frequency of side effects. Furthermore, the percentage of unsatisfied patients who rejected the method fell. Consequently, CICS remains the most useable clean technique to drain the bladder regarding neuro-urological patients. Most of physicians have already admitted, that CICS seems to be a safe and easy-to-learn method. In this review we aimed to analyze all pros and cons of CICS relating to patients with lower urinary tract dysfunction after SCI.\",\"PeriodicalId\":490070,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vestnik urologii\",\"volume\":\"70 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vestnik urologii\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21886/2308-6424-2023-11-3-131-141\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik urologii","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21886/2308-6424-2023-11-3-131-141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

清洁间歇自我导尿(CISC)多年来被认为是下尿路功能障碍患者膀胱引流的最佳方法。然而,对于长期CISC,由于并发症,心理障碍,身体残疾和社会不适应,该方法的依从率有限。根据最近的研究结果,亲水导尿管降低了复发性尿路感染(uti)和尿道创伤的发生率。从而提高脊髓损伤后排尿困难患者的生活质量和对CISC的接受度。新型涂层导管改进了自我置管技术,个性化管理,更好地获得帮助和建议,减少了副作用的发生频率。此外,不满意的患者拒绝该方法的百分比下降。因此,CICS仍然是神经泌尿系统患者膀胱引流最有效的清洁技术。大多数医生已经承认,CICS似乎是一种安全易学的方法。在这篇综述中,我们旨在分析与脊髓损伤后下尿路功能障碍患者相关的CICS的所有优点和缺点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Compliance of patients to clean intermittent self-catheterization after spinal cord injury
Clean intermittent self-catheterisation (CISC) was for many years considered the most preferable method to drain the bladder in patients with lower urinary tract disfunction. However, concerning long-term CISC, the adherence rate to the method was limited due to complications, psychological barriers, physical disabilities and social disadaptation. According to results of last studies hydrophilic catheters decrease the prevalence of recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs) and urethral trauma. Thereby patients with voiding difficulties after spinal cord injury (SCI) could gain a better quality of life and acceptance of CISC. New coated catheters improved self-catheterisation techniques, personalised management, and better access to help and advice reduced the frequency of side effects. Furthermore, the percentage of unsatisfied patients who rejected the method fell. Consequently, CICS remains the most useable clean technique to drain the bladder regarding neuro-urological patients. Most of physicians have already admitted, that CICS seems to be a safe and easy-to-learn method. In this review we aimed to analyze all pros and cons of CICS relating to patients with lower urinary tract dysfunction after SCI.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信