Blaaskatheterisatie Module 1 Evidence-tabellen
Evidence table for systematic review of RCTs and observational studies (intervention studies)
Study reference |
Study characteristics |
Patient characteristics |
Intervention (I) |
Comparison / control (C)
|
Follow-up |
Outcome measures and effect size |
Comments |
Kidd, 2015 |
SR and meta-analysis of RCTs |
See paper |
See paper |
See paper |
See paper |
See paper |
|
Ellahi, 2021 |
SR and meta-analysis of RCTs |
See paper |
See paper |
See paper |
See paper |
See paper |
|
Evidence table for intervention studies (randomized controlled trials and non-randomized observational studies [cohort studies, case-control studies, case series])1
Study reference |
Study characteristics |
Patient characteristics 2 |
Intervention (I) |
Comparison / control (C) 3
|
Follow-up |
Outcome measures and effect size 4 |
Comments |
Atılgan, 2020 |
Type of study: RCT Setting and country: Departments of Gynaecology and Urology of two University Hospitals, Turkey
Funding and conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest reported. The authors received no financial report |
Inclusion criteria: Stress urinary incontinence with intrinsic sphincter deficiency (genuine stress urinary incontinence) detected on urodynamic evaluation was included for this study for performing tension-free vaginal tape procedure. Exclusion criteria: Patients with pelvic organ prolapse (POP), postvoid residuals (PVR) in excess of 100 mL, tension-free vaginal tape performed with benign or malign gynecologic surgery procedures, positive or unavailable preoperative urine culture report, and comorbid systemic illness like cardiac failure, renal failure, or diabetes mellitus. N total at baseline: 70 Intervention: 35 Important prognostic factors2: For example Early: 42.8 ± 6.8 Duration of surgery (min) Early: 35.25 ± 21.8 BMI (Body Mass Index. De BMI is een index die de verhouding tussen lengte en gewicht bij een persoon weergeeft. De BMI wordt veel gebruikt om een indicatie te krijgen of er sprake is van overgewicht of ondergewicht.) Early: 24.85 ± 3.2 Groups comparable at baseline? Yes
|
Describe intervention (treatment/procedure/test): Early removal of catheter (within 6 hours after surgery).
|
Describe control (treatment/procedure/test): Late removal of catheter (24H later) |
Length of follow-up: Day 2 postoperative Loss-to-follow-up: No loss-to-follow-up. Incomplete outcome data.: No incomplete outcome data.
|
Outcome measures and effect size (include 95%CI and p-value if available): Bacteriuria Early: 4 patients (11.4%) Late: 12 patients (34.2%) |
All patients received 1 g antibiotic prophylaxis while starting surgery and continued twice a day postoperatively. Standard 16F Foley’s catheter was used. |
Igbodike, 2021 |
Type of study: RCT
Setting and country: Departments of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Perinatology, and the Medical Microbiology of the Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospitals Complex (OAUTHC), IléIfe, Nigeria. Funding and conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest and no financial support reported |
Inclusion criteria: Elective caesarean delivery between 34 weeks and 40 weeks, spinal anaesthesia and absence of pre-operative significant bacteriuria or UTI. Exclusion criteria: Intra-operative bladder injury and those that required conversion to general anaesthesia. N total at baseline: 300 Intervention: 150 Important prognostic factors2: For example Groups comparable at baseline? Yes
|
Describe intervention (treatment/procedure/test):
Urethral catheter removal eight hour post-surgery
|
Describe control (treatment/procedure/test):
Urethral catheter removal 24h post-surgery |
Length of follow-up: 48 h post-surgery
Loss-to-follow-up: None reported. Incomplete outcome data: None reported.
|
Outcome measures and effect size (include 95%CI and p-value if available):
Bacteriuria 8h group: 5 (3.3%) 24h group: 9 (6%) |
|
Notes:
- Prognostic balance between treatment groups is usually guaranteed in randomized studies, but non-randomized (observational) studies require matching of patients between treatment groups (case-control studies) or multivariate adjustment for prognostic factors (confounders) (cohort studies); the evidence table should contain sufficient details on these procedures.
- Provide data per treatment group on the most important prognostic factors [(potential) confounders].
- For case-control studies, provide sufficient detail on the procedure used to match cases and controls.
- For cohort studies, provide sufficient detail on the (multivariate) analyses used to adjust for (potential) confounders.