Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 May 6;45(9):1-9.
doi: 10.1017/ice.2024.73. Online ahead of print.

Clinical outcomes of female external urine wicking devices as alternatives to indwelling catheters: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Affiliations
Review

Clinical outcomes of female external urine wicking devices as alternatives to indwelling catheters: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Nicholas Pryor et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. .

Abstract

Background: Female patients using indwelling urinary catheters (IUCs) are disproportionately at risk for developing catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) compared to males. Female external urine wicking devices (FEUWDs) have emerged as potential alternatives to IUCs for incontinence management.

Objectives: To assess the clinical risks and benefits of FEUWDs as alternatives to IUCs.

Methods: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL Complete, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to July 10, 2023. Included studies used FEUWDs as an intervention and reported measures of urinary tract infections and secondary outcomes related to incontinence management.

Results: Of 2,580 returned records, 50 were systematically reviewed. Meta-analyses assessed rates of indwelling CAUTIs and IUC utilization. Following FEUWD implementation, IUC utilization rates decreased 14% (RR = 0.86, 95% CI = [0.76, 0.97]) and indwelling CAUTI rates nonsignificantly decreased up to 32% (IRR = 0.68, 95% CI = [0.39, 1.17]). Limited only to studies that described protocols for implementation, the incidence rate of indwelling CAUTIs decreased significantly up to 54% (IRR = 0.46, 95% CI = [0.32, 0.66]). Secondary outcomes were reported less routinely.

Conclusions: Overall, FEUWDs nonsignificantly reduced indwelling CAUTI rates, though reductions were significant among studies describing FEUWD implementation protocols. We recommend developing standard definitions for consistent reporting of non-indwelling CAUTI complications such as FEUWD-associated UTIs, skin injuries, and mobility-related complications.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Jennifer Meddings works as an Associate Editor for the Annals of Internal Medicine: Clinical Cases journal.

Similar articles

References

    1. Magill SS, Edwards JR, Bamberg W, et al. Multistate point-prevalence survey of health care-associated infections [published correction appears in N Engl J Med. 2022 Jun 16;386(24):2348]. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(13):1198–1208. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1306801 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Meddings J, Rogers MA, Krein SL, Fakih MG, Olmsted RN, Saint S. Reducing unnecessary urinary catheter use and other strategies to prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infection: an integrative review. BMJ Qual Saf. 2014;23(4):277–289. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001774 - DOI
    1. Hooton TM, Bradley SF, Cardenas DD, et al. Diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of catheter-associated urinary tract infection in adults: 2009 International Clinical Practice Guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2010;50(5):625–663. doi:10.1086/650482 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gray M, Skinner C, Kaler W. External collection devices as an alternative to the indwelling urinary catheter: Evidence-based review and expert clinical panel deliberations. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2016. May-Jun;43(3):301–7. doi: 10.1097/WON.0000000000000220 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Saint S, Lipsky BA, Baker PD, McDonald LL, Ossenkop K. Urinary catheters: What type do men and their nurses prefer? J Am Geriatr Soc. 1999;47(12):1453–1457. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.1999.tb01567.x - DOI - PubMed