Sanjay Saint, MD, MPH; Benjamin A. Lipsky, MD; Susan Dorr Goold, MD, MHSA, MA
Saint S, Lipsky BA, Goold SD. Indwelling Urinary Catheters: A One-Point Restraint?. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:125-127. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-137-2-200207160-00012
Download citation file:
Published: Ann Intern Med. 2002;137(2):125-127.
More than four decades ago, Dr. Paul Beeson persuasively argued against routine use of indwelling urinary catheters in hospitalized patients, making the “case against the catheter” (1). He urged, “The decision to use this instrument should be made with the knowledge that it involves risk of producing a serious disease” (1). This advice remains relevant today. Although these devices provide indispensable benefits, they are also the dominant risk factor for hospital-acquired urinary tract infection, the most common nosocomial infection in the United States (2). Infections and other untoward effects associated with indwelling urinary catheters lead to increased health care costs, patient discomfort, morbidity, and even death (3-6).
to gain full access to the content and tools.
Learn more about subscription options.
Register Now for a free account.
Hospital Medicine, Infectious Disease, Nephrology, Urological Disorders, Hospital-Acquired Infections.
Results provided by:
Copyright © 2016 American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.
Print ISSN: 0003-4819 | Online ISSN: 1539-3704
Conditions of Use
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only