Search

Background: Urinary catheters (UCs) with a closed urinary drainage system have been widely used in patients for many years. However, the frequency of replacing and operating these devices may be associated with catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI). Purpose: This study was designed to compare the incidence of CAUTI by replacement time (every 14 or ≥ 15 days) of the urinary drainage system. Methods: This 1-year prospective, nonrandomized controlled study was conducted in a major teaching hospital. The Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Nonrandomized Designs Statement checklist was used. All of the patients with UCs were divided into two groups based on each patient's preference with regard to replacement time of the urinary drainage system. Results: Five hundred sixty-two patients were evaluated, and 341 patients with UCs were enrolled as participants in the study. In the per-protocol analysis, 16 patients (22.2%; 9.3 episodes/ 1,000 catheter-days) in the 14-day group and 15 patients (17.9%; relative risk = 1.24, 95% confidence interval [0.66, 2.34]) in the ≥ 15-day group (7.7 episodes/1,000 catheter-days; incidence density ratio 1.20, 95%confidence interval [0.60, 2.43]) had CAUTIs. A comparison of cleanliness within urinary bags showed no significant intergroup difference (p > .05). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the incidence of CAUTI between the two groups was also not significantly different (p > .05). Conclusions: No statistically significant difference in the incidence of CAUTI was identified between patients who used the 14-day replacement interval and those who used the ≥ 15-day replacement interval for their urinary drainage system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients must adhere to their prescribed warfarin regimens and regularly monitor the anticoagulation effect to maintain therapeutic levels. The ability to evaluate regimen adherence accurately is crucial to the success of patient coaching. However, prevention of thromboembolic events is challenging when the association between medication adherence and the actual amount of anticoagulant agent taken cannot be determined. Purpose: This study used self-reported medication taken and prescription refills to (a) verify warfarin medication adherence and (b) assist clinicians to determine the discrepancy between medication adherence and anticoagulant control efficacy. Methods: This study was conducted at a national-university-affiliated hospital in Yilan County, Taiwan. Structured questionnaires and medical record reviews were adopted. A 100-point visual analog scale was used to measure the reported adherence of participants, whereas medication refill adherence was compared against self-reported adherence. Finally, degree of adherence was evaluated based on time in therapeutic range. Results: This study included 192 participants. Half (n = 94, 49%) were women, and the mean age was 69.6 years. Mean scores were 92.2% for the visual analog scale and 87.3% for medication refill adherence. Medication adherence correlated significantly with age, as reflected in the visual analog scale scores (p <.05). The participants who were receiving polypharmacy with five types of medicines or less attained higher visual analog scale scores, whereas participants who were on warfarin for 2–12 months exhibited higher medication refill adherence. Time in therapeutic range correlated negatively with age, although stability improved with therapy duration. Conclusions/Implications for Practice: Despite their high self-reported adherence levels, patients of advanced age require careful monitoring of their time in therapeutic range. The participants in this study who were on warfarin for a relatively longer time exhibited higher stability in the therapeutic range, despite their low medication refill adherence. The results of this study suggest that patient age, duration of warfarin therapy, and polypharmacy are factors associated with medication adherence. The findings may facilitate future assessments of warfarin adherence in patients as well as the implementation of more effective clinical nursing procedures and management practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Insulin-naive patients are often reluctant to receive insulin treatment, and even insulin-treated patients frequently have poor rates of adherence to their prescribed insulin injection regimes. Assessing attitudes toward insulin injection may help in the design of interventions that improve the insulin injection behaviors of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). The concept of decisional balance has been associated with behavior in many studies and may be useful in assessing the attitude of patients with T2DM toward insulin injection. Decisional balance for insulin injection (DBII) has not been widely assessed in patients with T2DM. Purpose: The aim of this study was to develop an insulin injection (DBII) scale that is valid for insulin-naive and insulin-treated patients and to test the psychometric characteristics of this scale based on the concept of decisional balance. Methods: This cross-sectional study administered an 18-item DBII scale, including pro and con subscales, to 95 insulin-naive and 237 insulin-treated patients in Taiwan. The decisional balance score was calculated as the mean score of the pro subscale minus the mean score of the con subscale. Construct validity was examined using exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis; concurrent validity was assessed by examining the association between the score of the DBII scale and the stages of behavioral change and of hemoglobin A1c for, respectively, insulin-naive patients and insulin-treated patients; and reliability was assessed using internal consistency and test–retest reliability. Results: A 13-item DBII scale supported by exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis was developed. The stages of behavioral change and hemoglobin A1c levels were found to be significantly associated with the scores of decisional balance of the 13-item DBII scale for both insulin-naive and insulin-treated patients. The Cronbach's α ranged between.78 and.92. Conclusions: The 13-item DBII scale is appropriately short and possesses satisfactory validity and reliability for both insulin-naive and insulin-treated patients with T2DM. Healthcare providers may use this scale as a checklist to guide clinical discussions related to insulin therapy with both insulin-naive and insulin-treated patients with T2DM across time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]