Intermittent versus Indwellling?
(c) Sue Woodward
The first consideration should be whether the catheter should be inserted intermittently, either by the patient themselves (intermittent self-catheterisation) or by a nurse or care-giver, or whether the catheter needs to be left in situ in the bladder.
Intermittent catheterisation is considered to be preferable to indwelling catheterisation for a number of reasons, but primarily because of the reduced risk of infection and other complications (Turi et al, 2006).
Task 7
1 |
While patients requiring long-term help with bladder drainage are often considered for intermittent catheterisation, this technique could be used more widely. There is evidence that intermittent catheterisation has reduced risk of infection in older people following hip replacement surgery, for example (Johansson et al, 2002). It can be used for the management of post-operative urinary retention in a range of patient groups (Bødker & Lose, 2003). Age is also no barrier to intermittent catheterisation (Pilloni et al, 2005), although nurses may be reluctant to consider using the technique and it is rarely used with older people.
Leaving a catheter in situ promotes the development of a biofilm, a living layer of bacteria, on the catheter that can increase the risk of infection. Removing the catheter reduces this risk.
If an indwelling catheter is necessary then it may be better for the patient's quality of life to have a supra-pubic catheter inserted.
Task 8
2 |
Intermittent and suprapubic catheterisation are discussed further in the learning activity Suprapubic and Clean Intermittent Self-Catheterisation.