Accuracy of Measuring Bladder Volumes With Ultrasound and Bladder Scanning

Urinary Retention Evaluation and Catheterization Algorithm for Adult Inpatients

Importance

Acute urinary retention (UR) is common, yet variations in diagnosis and management can lead to inappropriate catheterization and harm.

Objective

To develop an algorithm for screening and management of UR among adult inpatients.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this mixed-methods study using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and qualitative interviews, an 11-member multidisciplinary expert panel of nurses and physicians from across the US used a formal multi-round process from March to May 2015 to rate 107 clinical scenarios involving diagnosis and management of adult UR in postoperative and medical inpatients. The panel ratings informed the first algorithm draft. Semistructured interviews were conducted from October 2020 to May 2021 with 33 frontline clinicians-nurses and surgeons from 5 Michigan hospitals-to gather feedback and inform algorithm refinements.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Panelists categorized scenarios assessing when to use bladder scanners, catheterization at various scanned bladder volumes, and choice of catheterization modalities as appropriate, inappropriate, or uncertain. Next, qualitative methods were used to understand the perceived need, usability, and potential algorithm uses.

Results

The 11-member expert panel (10 men and 1 woman) used the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to develop a UR algorithm including the following: (1) bladder scanners were preferred over catheterization for UR diagnosis in symptomatic patients or starting as soon as 3 hours since last void if asymptomatic, (2) bladder scanner volumes appropriate to prompt catheterization were 300 mL or greater in symptomatic patients and 500 mL or greater in asymptomatic patients, and (3) intermittent was preferred to indwelling catheterization for managing lower bladder volumes. Interview findings were organized into 3 domains (perceived need, feedback on algorithm, and implementation suggestions). The 33 frontline clinicians (9 men and 24 women) who reviewed the algorithm reported that an evidence-based protocol (1) was needed and could be helpful to clinicians, (2) should be simple and graphically appealing to improve rapid clinician review, and (3) should be integrated within the electronic medical record and prominently displayed in hospital units to increase awareness. The draft algorithm was iteratively refined based on stakeholder feedback.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study using a systematic, multidisciplinary, evidence- and expert opinion-based approach, a UR evaluation and catheterization algorithm was developed to improve patient safety by increasing appropriate use of bladder scanners and catheterization. This algorithm addresses the need for practical guidance to manage UR among adult inpatients.

Risk factors for postoperative urinary retention in fragility hip fracture patients: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Postoperative urinary retention (POUR) among older patients with hip fractures is common and may result in delayed ambulation, prolonged hospital stays, and urinary tract infections. Although preoperative urinary catheter indwelling and early postoperative removal can prevent perioperative urinary retention, this condition may occur in some patients after catheter removal, which requires urinary catheter re-indwelling or intermittent catheterization. Therefore, this study aims to identify risk factors and develop a screening tool for postoperative urinary retention in patients who have undergone operative treatment for fragility hip fractures subsequent to urinary catheter removal.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of 145 fragility hip fracture in older patients who were operatively treated between September 2020 and May 2022 was conducted. All patients were evaluated for urine retention after urinary catheter removal using a bladder scan. In addition, factors related to urinary retention were collected and utilized for screening tool development.

RESULTS

Of the included patients, 22 (15.2%) were diagnosed with POUR. A multivariable logistic regression model using a stepwise backward elimination algorithm identified the current use of drugs with anticholinergic effect (OR = 11.9, p = 0.012), international prostate symptom score (IPSS) ≥ 8 (OR = 9.3, p < 0.001), and inability to independently get out of bed within 24 h postoperatively (OR = 6.5, p = 0.051) as risk factors of POUR. The screening tool that has been developed revealed an excellent performance (AuROC = 0.85, 95%CI 0.75 to 0.91) with good calibration and minimal optimism.

CONCLUSIONS

Current use of drugs with anticholinergic effects, IPSS ≥ 8, and inability to independently get out of bed within 24 h postoperatively are significant variables of POUR. For additional external validation, a proposed scoring system for POUR screening was developed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study protocol was retrospectively registered in The Thai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR20220502001: 2 May 2022).

Agreement and Reliability of Patient-measured Postvoid Residual Bladder Volumes

OBJECTIVE

To assess the reliability, agreement with provider measurement, and patient preferences regarding patient self-measurement of postvoid residual bladder volume (PVR). PVR measurement in the nonhealthcare setting is a valuable opportunity for remote monitoring of voiding dysfunction patients. We hypothesized that patient self-measurement of PVR using a smart-device portable ultrasound system with artificial intelligence would demonstrate high reliability, strong agreement with provider measurement, and be preferred over provider measurements.

METHODS

Patients were enrolled during outpatient Urology visits. PVRs were measured in triplicate by providers using each of the following: an FDA-cleared (standard) bladder scanner, the portable ultrasound probe using ultrasound images (Butterfly US image mode), and the portable ultrasound probe using abstract images (Butterfly abstract mode). Subjects self-measured PVRs in triplicate using both imaging modes and reported their experiences via questionnaire. Reliability was assessed via intraclass correlation. Agreement between methods was assessed via Bland-Altman analyses using a clinically acceptable difference threshold of 50 mL.

RESULTS

Fifty patients were enrolled. Intraclass correlations ranged from 0.95 to 0.98 for each method. 95% limits of agreement between standard bladder scanner and patient self-measurement were - 71.73 mL and 86.73 mL using Butterfly US image mode and - 93.84 mL and 112.52 mL using Butterfly abstract mode, respectively. Most patients preferred self-measurement over provider measurement (74% vs 26%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Patient self-measurement of PVR using smart-device integrated portable ultrasound probes is feasible, reliable, and preferred by patients. Limits of agreement between patient self-measurement and standard bladder scanner measurements exceeded our clinically acceptable difference threshold, though the inherent error of ultrasound-based bladder volume measurements should be considered. Longitudinal PVR assessments in nonhealthcare settings may facilitate remote monitoring of voiding dysfunction patients.

Point-of-Care Ultrasound in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit

Ultrasonography has been widely used in medicine for decades but often by specific users such as cardiologists, obstetricians, and radiologists. In the last several years, the use of this imaging modality has moved to the bedside, with clinicians performing and interpreting focused point of care ultrasonography to aid in immediate assessment and management of their patients. The growth of point of care ultrasonography has been facilitated by advancement in ultrasound-related technology and emerging studies and protocols demonstrating its utility in clinical practice. However, considerable challenges remain before this modality can be adopted across the spectrum of disciplines, primarily as it relates to training, competency, and standardization of usage. This review outlines the history, current state, challenges and the future direction of point of care ultrasonography specifically in the field of pediatric critical care medicine.