Weiwei Cao, Min Lei, Yanfei Yu, Weizhen Cheng, Rong Huang, Kun Liu
{"title":"使用留置导尿管的神经源性膀胱患者夹闭导尿管与自由引流:一项 Meta 分析。","authors":"Weiwei Cao, Min Lei, Yanfei Yu, Weizhen Cheng, Rong Huang, Kun Liu","doi":"10.1177/10998004241313393","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> 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. <b>Methods:</b> 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. <b>Results:</b> 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), <i>p <</i> .001]. The difference in time to first urination [SMD = 0.10, 95%CI (-0.68, 0.89), <i>p</i> = .80], residual urine volume [MD = -5.18, 95%CI (-17.27, 6.90), <i>p</i> = .40], incidence of urinary retention [MD = 1.07, 95%CI (0.30, 3.87), <i>p</i> = .92], the incidence of urinary tract infection [RR = 1.38, 95%CI (0.64, 2.97), <i>p</i> = .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. <b>Conclusion:</b> In light of the existing body of evidence, the routine practice of catheter clamping in catheterized patients with neurogenic bladder is not recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":93901,"journal":{"name":"Biological research for nursing","volume":" ","pages":"10998004241313393"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clamping Catheter Versus Free Drainage for Patients With Neurogenic Bladder With Indwelling Urinary Catheter: A Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Weiwei Cao, Min Lei, Yanfei Yu, Weizhen Cheng, Rong Huang, Kun Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10998004241313393\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> 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. <b>Methods:</b> 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. <b>Results:</b> 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), <i>p <</i> .001]. The difference in time to first urination [SMD = 0.10, 95%CI (-0.68, 0.89), <i>p</i> = .80], residual urine volume [MD = -5.18, 95%CI (-17.27, 6.90), <i>p</i> = .40], incidence of urinary retention [MD = 1.07, 95%CI (0.30, 3.87), <i>p</i> = .92], the incidence of urinary tract infection [RR = 1.38, 95%CI (0.64, 2.97), <i>p</i> = .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. <b>Conclusion:</b> In light of the existing body of evidence, the routine practice of catheter clamping in catheterized patients with neurogenic bladder is not recommended.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93901,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biological research for nursing\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"10998004241313393\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biological research for nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10998004241313393\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biological research for nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10998004241313393","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
背景:在临床环境中,神经源性膀胱功能障碍患者通常使用留置导尿管进行泌尿管理。在该患者群体中,导管夹紧与持续自由引流的比较疗效尚未确定。本荟萃分析旨在探讨导管夹持与自然引流在神经源性膀胱患者中的疗效和安全性,为神经源性膀胱患者的治疗和护理提供依据。方法:两名研究人员在Clinicaltrials等随机对照试验(RCTs)数据库中进行文献检索,比较神经源性膀胱留置导尿管患者夹持导尿管与自由引流。采用Cochrane手册推荐的RCT偏倚风险评估工具进行质量评估。采用RevMan 5.3软件进行meta分析。结果:共纳入8项随机对照试验,涉及772例神经源性膀胱患者。置管后患者首次排尿量明显增加[MD = 52.86, 95%CI (42.30, 63.41), p .001]。首次排尿时间[SMD = 0.10, 95%CI (-0.68, 0.89), p = 0.80]、残余尿量[MD = -5.18, 95%CI (-17.27, 6.90), p = 0.40]、尿潴留发生率[MD = 1.07, 95%CI (0.30, 3.87), p = 0.92]、尿路感染发生率[RR = 1.38, 95%CI (0.64, 2.97), p = 0.42]两组比较差异均无统计学意义。Egger的回归分析结果显示没有统计学发表偏倚的证据。结论:根据现有的大量证据,不推荐神经源性膀胱置管患者常规夹管。
Clamping Catheter Versus Free Drainage for Patients With Neurogenic Bladder With Indwelling Urinary Catheter: A Meta-Analysis.
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.