Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-30T20:16:19.262Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of H2O2 Prophylaxis of Bacteriuria in Patients with Long-Term Indwelling Foley Catheters: A Randomized Controlled Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Donna E. Sweet ,
Hewitt C. Goodpasture ,
Katherine Holl ,
Sharon Smart ,
Holly Alexander  and
Ahmad Hedari
Donna E. Sweet*
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, and the Aseptic Practice, Microbiology, and Biostatistics Departments, Wesley Medical Center, Wichita, Kansas
Hewitt C. Goodpasture
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, and the Aseptic Practice, Microbiology, and Biostatistics Departments, Wesley Medical Center, Wichita, Kansas
Katherine Holl
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, and the Aseptic Practice, Microbiology, and Biostatistics Departments, Wesley Medical Center, Wichita, Kansas
Sharon Smart
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, and the Aseptic Practice, Microbiology, and Biostatistics Departments, Wesley Medical Center, Wichita, Kansas
Holly Alexander
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, and the Aseptic Practice, Microbiology, and Biostatistics Departments, Wesley Medical Center, Wichita, Kansas
Ahmad Hedari
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, and the Aseptic Practice, Microbiology, and Biostatistics Departments, Wesley Medical Center, Wichita, Kansas
*
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, 1010 N. Kansas, Wichita, KS 67214
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Since the long-term catheterized patient is at significant risk of urinary tract infection, and the catheter drainage bags of these patients are at significant risk of becoming reservoirs for nosocomial pathogens, we carried out a randomized, controlled study to determine the efficacy of intermittent drainage bag instillation of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) in patients requiring indwelling Foley catheters for 5 days or more. Herein we report the effects of this technique on the rates of catheter and bag bacteriuria, the duration to positive culture, the temporal relationships observed, and the spectrum of organisms recovered. Bag source bacteriuria was found with the same frequency in both control and H2O2 groups. H2O2 did reduce contamination of the drainage bag but did not reduce catheter-associated bacteriuria or frequency of symptomatic urinary tract infection. Furthermore, H2O2 did not reduce the frequency of bag contamination with most of the common nosocomial urinary pathogens.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 6 , Issue 7 , July 1985 , pp. 263 - 266
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Kunin, CM, McCormack, RC: Prevention of catheter-induced urinary tract infections by sterile closed drainage. N Engl J Med 1966; 274:1156.Google Scholar
2.Schaberg, DR, Alford, RH, Anderson, R, et al: An outbreak of nosocomial infection due to multiply resistant Serratia marcescens: Evidence of interhospital spread. J Infect Dis 1976; 134:181–188.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Thornton, GF, Andriole, VT: Bacteriuria during indwelling catheter drainage. JAMA 1970; 214:339–342.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Maizels, M, Schaeffer, AJ: Decreased incidence of bacteriuria associated with periodic instillations of hydrogen peroxide into the urethral catheter drainage bag. J Urol 1980; 123(6):841–845.Google Scholar
5.Steinen, L: Urinary drainage need not lead to UTI. Journal of the Operating Room Research Institute 1982; 2(12): 14–24.Google Scholar
6.Thompson, RL, Haley, CE, Searcy, MA, et al: Catheter-associated bacteriuria: Failure to reduce attack rates using periodic instillations of a disinfectant into urinary drainage system. JAMA 1984; 251:747–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Goodpasture, HC, Minns, GO, Peterie, JD: Infection following placement of Foley catheters. Kans Med Soc 1978; 79(9):478–483.Google Scholar
8.Garibaldi, RA, Burke, JP, Dickman, ML, et al: Factors predisposing to bacteriuria during indwelling urethral catheterization. N Engl J Med 1974; 291:215–219.Google Scholar
9.Kass, EH, Schneiderman, LJ: Entry of bacteria into the urinary tracts of patients with inlying catheters. N Engl J Med 1957; 256(12):556–557.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Garibaldi, RA, Burke, JP, Britt, MR, et al: Meatal colonization and catheter-associated bacteriuria. N Engl J Med 1980; 303(6):316–318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed