Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Evaluating a Nurse-Driven Protocol for Indwelling Bladder Catheter Removal in Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury.

Created on 26 Apr 2025

Authors

Christian Makar, Aeryus Holloway, Olutola Akande, Akhil Chandekar, Olive Anagu, Mallory Jebbia, Victor C Joe

Published in

Journal for healthcare quality : official publication of the National Association for Healthcare Quality. Apr 25, 2025. Epub Apr 25, 2025.

Abstract

Catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) are common complications in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) who require indwelling bladder catheters (IBCs). This study examined the impact of an Acute Urinary Retention Algorithm (AURA) nursing protocol that incorporates intermittent catheterization (IC) on CAUTI incidence.
A retrospective analysis was conducted on TBI patients with IBCs placed between 2018 and 2022 at a Level I trauma center in Southern California. Catheter-associated urinary tract infection incidence and catheter-associated complications were compared between patients treated with and without the AURA protocol.
Among 73,005 patients with IBC, 255 had TBI and were admitted to the intensive care unit. Only 27 (10.6%) patients had catheters removed through the AURA protocol and had longer dwell times than the nonprotocol patients (2.59 vs. 2.44 days, p < .001). Catheter-associated urinary tract infection incidence was statistically similar between the protocol (7.4%) and nonprotocol groups (3.5%) (p = .327). However, patients who developed CAUTI were more likely to have undergone more than one IC.
Timely removal of IBCs is crucial to minimizing the risk of CAUTI. This study highlights the underutilization of nurse-driven protocols such as AURA and suggests a careful application of IC in such protocols because of its potential association with increased CAUTI risk.

PMID:
40279521
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 26 Apr 2025.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 37
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement