Cargando…

Intra-abdominal pressure measurement using the FoleyManometer does not increase the risk for urinary tract infection in critically ill patients

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) monitoring using the FoleyManometer (Holtech Medical, Charlottenlund, Denmark) increases the risk of urinary tract infection (UTI). DESIGN: A retrospective database review was conducted. SETTING: The study was c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Desie, Nele, Willems, Alexandra, De laet, Inneke, Dits, Hilde, Van Regenmortel, Niels, Schoonheydt, Karen, Van De Vyvere, Martine, Malbrain, Manu LNG
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3390297/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22873411
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2110-5820-2-S1-S10
_version_ 1782237422842544128
author Desie, Nele
Willems, Alexandra
De laet, Inneke
Dits, Hilde
Van Regenmortel, Niels
Schoonheydt, Karen
Van De Vyvere, Martine
Malbrain, Manu LNG
author_facet Desie, Nele
Willems, Alexandra
De laet, Inneke
Dits, Hilde
Van Regenmortel, Niels
Schoonheydt, Karen
Van De Vyvere, Martine
Malbrain, Manu LNG
author_sort Desie, Nele
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) monitoring using the FoleyManometer (Holtech Medical, Charlottenlund, Denmark) increases the risk of urinary tract infection (UTI). DESIGN: A retrospective database review was conducted. SETTING: The study was conducted in the 12-bed medical intensive care unit of ZNA Stuivenberg Hospital (Antwerp, Belgium), a tertiary hospital. PATIENTS: There were 5,890 patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit of which 1,097 patients underwent intrabladder pressure (IBP) monitoring as estimate for IAP. INTERVENTIONS: Crude and adjusted UTI rates were compared among patients undergoing IAP measurements with three different intrabladder methods: a modified homemade technique, a FoleyManometer with 35 ml reservoir, and a FoleyManometer low volume (FoleyManometerLV) with less than 10 ml priming volume. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Four consecutive time periods of 24 months were defined and compared with regard to IAP measurement: period 1 (2000-2001), during which IAP monitoring was not used routinely (which serves as a control group), was compared with period 2 (2002-2003), using a modified homemade technique; period 3 (2004-2005), introducing the FoleyManometer; and finally period 4 (2006-2007), in which the FoleyManometerLV was introduced. The incidence of IBP measurements increased from 1.4% in period 1 to 45.4% in period 4 (p < 0.001). At the same time, the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (version 2) (SAPS-II) increased significantly from 24.4 ± 21.5 to 34.9 ± 18.7 (p < 0.001) together with the percentage of ventilated patients from 18.6% to 40.7% (p < 0.001). In total, 1,097 patients had IAP measurements via the bladder. The UTI rates were adjusted for disease severity by multiplying each crude rate with the ratio of control versus study patient SAPS-II probability of mortality. Crude and adjusted UTI rates per 1,000 catheter days (CD) were on average 16.1 and 12.8/1,000 CD, respectively, and were not significantly different between the four time periods. CONCLUSIONS: Intrabladder pressure monitoring as estimate for IAP either via a closed transducer technique or the closed FoleyManometer technique seems safe and does not alter the risk of UTI in critically ill patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3390297
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Springer
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33902972012-07-06 Intra-abdominal pressure measurement using the FoleyManometer does not increase the risk for urinary tract infection in critically ill patients Desie, Nele Willems, Alexandra De laet, Inneke Dits, Hilde Van Regenmortel, Niels Schoonheydt, Karen Van De Vyvere, Martine Malbrain, Manu LNG Ann Intensive Care Research OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) monitoring using the FoleyManometer (Holtech Medical, Charlottenlund, Denmark) increases the risk of urinary tract infection (UTI). DESIGN: A retrospective database review was conducted. SETTING: The study was conducted in the 12-bed medical intensive care unit of ZNA Stuivenberg Hospital (Antwerp, Belgium), a tertiary hospital. PATIENTS: There were 5,890 patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit of which 1,097 patients underwent intrabladder pressure (IBP) monitoring as estimate for IAP. INTERVENTIONS: Crude and adjusted UTI rates were compared among patients undergoing IAP measurements with three different intrabladder methods: a modified homemade technique, a FoleyManometer with 35 ml reservoir, and a FoleyManometer low volume (FoleyManometerLV) with less than 10 ml priming volume. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Four consecutive time periods of 24 months were defined and compared with regard to IAP measurement: period 1 (2000-2001), during which IAP monitoring was not used routinely (which serves as a control group), was compared with period 2 (2002-2003), using a modified homemade technique; period 3 (2004-2005), introducing the FoleyManometer; and finally period 4 (2006-2007), in which the FoleyManometerLV was introduced. The incidence of IBP measurements increased from 1.4% in period 1 to 45.4% in period 4 (p < 0.001). At the same time, the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (version 2) (SAPS-II) increased significantly from 24.4 ± 21.5 to 34.9 ± 18.7 (p < 0.001) together with the percentage of ventilated patients from 18.6% to 40.7% (p < 0.001). In total, 1,097 patients had IAP measurements via the bladder. The UTI rates were adjusted for disease severity by multiplying each crude rate with the ratio of control versus study patient SAPS-II probability of mortality. Crude and adjusted UTI rates per 1,000 catheter days (CD) were on average 16.1 and 12.8/1,000 CD, respectively, and were not significantly different between the four time periods. CONCLUSIONS: Intrabladder pressure monitoring as estimate for IAP either via a closed transducer technique or the closed FoleyManometer technique seems safe and does not alter the risk of UTI in critically ill patients. Springer 2012-07-05 /pmc/articles/PMC3390297/ /pubmed/22873411 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2110-5820-2-S1-S10 Text en Copyright ©2012 Desie et al.; licensee Springer http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Desie, Nele
Willems, Alexandra
De laet, Inneke
Dits, Hilde
Van Regenmortel, Niels
Schoonheydt, Karen
Van De Vyvere, Martine
Malbrain, Manu LNG
Intra-abdominal pressure measurement using the FoleyManometer does not increase the risk for urinary tract infection in critically ill patients
title Intra-abdominal pressure measurement using the FoleyManometer does not increase the risk for urinary tract infection in critically ill patients
title_full Intra-abdominal pressure measurement using the FoleyManometer does not increase the risk for urinary tract infection in critically ill patients
title_fullStr Intra-abdominal pressure measurement using the FoleyManometer does not increase the risk for urinary tract infection in critically ill patients
title_full_unstemmed Intra-abdominal pressure measurement using the FoleyManometer does not increase the risk for urinary tract infection in critically ill patients
title_short Intra-abdominal pressure measurement using the FoleyManometer does not increase the risk for urinary tract infection in critically ill patients
title_sort intra-abdominal pressure measurement using the foleymanometer does not increase the risk for urinary tract infection in critically ill patients
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3390297/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22873411
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2110-5820-2-S1-S10
work_keys_str_mv AT desienele intraabdominalpressuremeasurementusingthefoleymanometerdoesnotincreasetheriskforurinarytractinfectionincriticallyillpatients
AT willemsalexandra intraabdominalpressuremeasurementusingthefoleymanometerdoesnotincreasetheriskforurinarytractinfectionincriticallyillpatients
AT delaetinneke intraabdominalpressuremeasurementusingthefoleymanometerdoesnotincreasetheriskforurinarytractinfectionincriticallyillpatients
AT ditshilde intraabdominalpressuremeasurementusingthefoleymanometerdoesnotincreasetheriskforurinarytractinfectionincriticallyillpatients
AT vanregenmortelniels intraabdominalpressuremeasurementusingthefoleymanometerdoesnotincreasetheriskforurinarytractinfectionincriticallyillpatients
AT schoonheydtkaren intraabdominalpressuremeasurementusingthefoleymanometerdoesnotincreasetheriskforurinarytractinfectionincriticallyillpatients
AT vandevyveremartine intraabdominalpressuremeasurementusingthefoleymanometerdoesnotincreasetheriskforurinarytractinfectionincriticallyillpatients
AT malbrainmanulng intraabdominalpressuremeasurementusingthefoleymanometerdoesnotincreasetheriskforurinarytractinfectionincriticallyillpatients