Lyth 1997.
| Study characteristics | ||
| Methods |
Study design: RCT Dates study conducted: not reported |
|
| Participants |
Number of participants: eligible, not reported; 118 randomised; 107 reported Country: UK Population: unclear Age (mean and SD): not reported Inclusion criteria: TURP or bladder neck incision Condition for hospitalisation: TURP or bladder neck incision Exclusion criteria: not reported Use of antibiotic prophylaxis: not reported |
|
| Interventions |
Group A (n = 33): removal of IUC at 6 am Group B (n = 39): removal of IUC at midnight A third group of 35 participants were not included in our analysis because they received an intervention (infusion trial of micturition) that was outside the scope of this review. Size and type of catheter used: not reported Study definition of short‐term catheterisation (days): not reported Intended duration of catheterisation for each group: A: IUC removed at 6 am B: IUC removed at midnight C: infusion trial of micturition (infusion performed by nursing staff, infusing saline from a 500 mL bag of saline via a standard IV giving set attached to the catheter at a fast drip rate until the patient felt the bladder was full) |
|
| Outcomes | Mean volume of first void (mL) Removal of catheter to discharge decision (h; mean, SD) Incidence of urinary retention and recatheterisation Patient satisfaction |
|
| Definition of CAUTI or bacteriuria | Not reported | |
| Sponsorship/funding | Not reported | |
| Ethical approval | Not reported | |
| Notes | 96 participants had TURP and 22 participants had bladder neck incision 11 participants were excluded from the analysis as data on 5 participants were incomplete and 2 participants had to be recatheterised |
|
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Quote: “… randomized trial …” Comment: unclear as to what the randomisation process involved |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Not reported |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | Not reported. Unlikely that participants could have been blinded |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Not reported |
| Blinding of microbiological outcome (detection bias) | Low risk | No microbiological outcomes reported |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | High risk | 5/118 excluded due to missing data, 6/118 excluded because they "failed the trial and had to be re‐catheterised". Unclear which intervention group these belonged to |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Outcomes seem to be reported in full in methods and results sections |
| Other bias | Low risk | Appears to be free from other sources of bias |