Effect of active versus passive void trials on time to patient discharge, urinary tract infection, and urinary retention: a randomized clinical trial.

MedStar author(s):
Citation: World Journal of Urology. 2019 Nov 15PMID: 31732771Institution: MedStar Washington Hospital CenterDepartment: UrologyForm of publication: Journal ArticleMedline article type(s): Journal ArticleSubject headings: IN PROCESS -- NOT YET INDEXEDYear: 2019ISSN:
  • 0724-4983
Name of journal: World journal of urologyAbstract: CONCLUSION: Our study comparing AVT versus PVT demonstrated no difference in time to discharge despite a 3.6 h reduction in time to void associated with AVT. AVT was associated with a 63% reduction in UTI, with no difference seen in UR rates across cohorts. Given the reduction in UTI and technical advantages, our data suggest that AVT should be considered as a recommended technique for void trial protocol.METHODS: We performed a prospective, randomized trial comparing active (AVT) versus passive (PVT) void trials of inpatients requiring urethral catheter removal. Of 329 eligible patients, 274 were randomized to AVT (bladder filled with saline before catheter removal) or PVT (spontaneous bladder filling after catheter removal). Primary outcome was time to hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes were UTI (NSQIP criteria) and UR (requiring repeat catheterization) within 2 weeks of void trial.PURPOSE: We sought to determine the effect of active versus passive voiding trials on time to hospital discharge and rates of urinary tract infection (UTI) and urinary retention (UR).RESULTS: The median time to void was 18 (5-115) versus 236 (136-360) min in the AVT and PVT groups, respectively (p < 0.0001). However, no difference was seen in comparison of the median time to hospital discharge between AVT [28.4 (13.6-69.3) h] and PVT [30.0 (10.4-75.6) h] cohorts, respectively (p = 0.93). Six (4.8%) and 13 (12.9%) patients developed UTI in the AVT and PVT groups, respectively (p = 0.03). Eleven (8.8%) and 12 (11.9%) patients developed UR in the AVT and PVT groups, respectively (p = 0.36).TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02886143 (clinicaltrials.gov).All authors: Agard HE, Case RM Jr, Hougen HY, Krupski TL, McMurry TL, Mills JT, Rapp DE, Schenkman NS, Shaw NMFiscal year: FY2020Digital Object Identifier: Date added to catalog: 2019-12-04
Holdings
Item type Current library Collection Call number Status Date due Barcode
Journal Article MedStar Authors Catalog Article 31732771 Available 31732771

CONCLUSION: Our study comparing AVT versus PVT demonstrated no difference in time to discharge despite a 3.6 h reduction in time to void associated with AVT. AVT was associated with a 63% reduction in UTI, with no difference seen in UR rates across cohorts. Given the reduction in UTI and technical advantages, our data suggest that AVT should be considered as a recommended technique for void trial protocol.

METHODS: We performed a prospective, randomized trial comparing active (AVT) versus passive (PVT) void trials of inpatients requiring urethral catheter removal. Of 329 eligible patients, 274 were randomized to AVT (bladder filled with saline before catheter removal) or PVT (spontaneous bladder filling after catheter removal). Primary outcome was time to hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes were UTI (NSQIP criteria) and UR (requiring repeat catheterization) within 2 weeks of void trial.

PURPOSE: We sought to determine the effect of active versus passive voiding trials on time to hospital discharge and rates of urinary tract infection (UTI) and urinary retention (UR).

RESULTS: The median time to void was 18 (5-115) versus 236 (136-360) min in the AVT and PVT groups, respectively (p < 0.0001). However, no difference was seen in comparison of the median time to hospital discharge between AVT [28.4 (13.6-69.3) h] and PVT [30.0 (10.4-75.6) h] cohorts, respectively (p = 0.93). Six (4.8%) and 13 (12.9%) patients developed UTI in the AVT and PVT groups, respectively (p = 0.03). Eleven (8.8%) and 12 (11.9%) patients developed UR in the AVT and PVT groups, respectively (p = 0.36).

TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02886143 (clinicaltrials.gov).

English

Powered by Koha