McDonald 1999.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: RCT Dates study conducted: November 1995‐October 1996
Participants	Number of participants: eligible, unclear; 48 randomised; 48 reported Country: Australia Population: men Inclusion criteria: patients undergoing TURP Condition for hospitalisation: TURP Exclusion criteria: not reported Age (mean and range): A 66.7 (51‐81); B 68.7 (57‐89); overall: 67.8 (51‐89) Use of antibiotic prophylaxis: not reported
Interventions	Group A (n = 20): removal of IUC at midnight Group B (n = 28): removal of IUC at 6 am 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 midnight B: IUC removed at 6 am
Outcomes	Mean volume of first void Mean time to first void Discharged same day as IUC removal Discharged next day
Definition of CAUTI or bacteriuria	Not reported
Sponsorship/funding	Not reported
Ethical approval	“The study was approved by the research committee; verbal consent was judged adequate for participation in this investigation.”
Notes	3 participants were withdrawn from analysis as 1 passed urine in the toilet without informing the staff, the second experienced an extended length of stay due to superficial vein thrombosis and the third failed his trial of void for 10 h after catheter removal. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups with respect to tissue pathology.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: “A random‐digit chart was used to allocate patients” Comment: method of randomisation unclear
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not reported
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Not reported. Unlikely participants were able to be 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	Unclear risk	3/48 excluded from analysis. Unclear which group these 3 belonged to.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All outcomes seem to be reported in full in both the methods and results section. Protocol not available.
Other bias	Low risk	Appears to be free from other sources of bias