Tab. I.
Overview of the evidence level for a comparison of HCIC and non-HCIC catheters for the different pathologies [5].
| Population | Satisfaction | Preference | Adverse events | UTI | QoL | HEOR | Pain and discomfort |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SCI | ++/- | + | ++/-- | +++/- | ++ | +++/-- | + |
| SB | +/-- | ++/- | /-- | +/-- | ++ | NA | /- |
| MS | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| BPH | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| Mixed | +++/- | +++ | +++/- | +++/-- | +++ | +++/-- | +++/- |
| All | +++/- | +++ | +++/-- | +++/-- | +++ | +++/-- | +++/-- |
| BPH: Benign prostate hypertrophy; HCIC: Hydrophilic-coated intermittent catheters; HEOR: Health economics and outcomes research; MS: Multiple sclerosis; NA: Not available; QoL: Quality of life; SB: Spina bifida; SCI: Spinal cord injury; UTI: Urinary tract infection. | |||||||
| +to+++: the literature supports claims of hydrophilic catheters as being superior to uncoated catheters; - to --- : no significant diference between hydrophilic and uncoated catheters or uncoated catheters are superior. | |||||||