posted on 2018-05-23, 11:31authored byNiall Francis Davis, Eoghan M. Cunnane, Rory Mooney, James C. Forde, Michael T. Walsh
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of a novel “safety-valve” device for preventing catheter related urethral
trauma during urethral catheterization (UC). To assess the opinions of clinicians on the performance
of the safety-valve device.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A validated prototype “safety-valve” device for preventing catheter balloon inflation related urethral
injuries was prospectively piloted in male patients requiring UC in a tertiary referral teaching
hospital (n = 100). The device allows fluid in the catheter system to decant through an activated
safety threshold pressure valve if the catheter anchoring balloon is misplaced. Users evaluated
the “safety-valve” with an anonymous questionnaire. The primary outcome measurement was prevention
of anchoring balloon inflation in the urethra. Secondary outcome measurement was successful
inflation of urinary catheter anchoring balloon in the bladder.
RESULTS: Patient age was 76 ± 12 years and American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade was 3 ± 1.4. The
“safety-valve” was utilized by 34 clinicians and activated in 7% (n = 7/100) patients during attempted
UC, indicating that the catheter anchoring balloon was incorrectly positioned in the
patient’s urethra. In these 7 cases, the catheter was successfully manipulated into the urinary bladder
and inflated. 31 of 34 (91%) clinicians completed the questionnaire. Ten percent (n = 3/31) of
respondents had previously inflated a urinary catheter anchoring balloon in the urethra and 100%
(n = 31) felt that a safety mechanism for preventing balloon inflation in the urethra should be compulsory for all UCs.
CONCLUSION: The safety-valve device piloted in this clinical study offers an effective solution for preventing
catheter balloon inflation related urethral injuries.
History
Publication
Urology;115, pp. 179-183
Publisher
Elsevier
Note
peer-reviewed
Rights
This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Urology. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Urology, 115, pp. 179-183, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2018.02.026