A Real-world Data Analysis of Intermittent Catheterization, Showing the Impact of Prelubricated Versus Hydrophilic Catheter Use on the Occurrence of Symptoms Suggestive of Urinary Tract Infections

Abstract

BackgroundSystematic reviews have highlighted the lack of evidence on choosing the type of intermittent urinary catheter (IUC) with regard to the occurrence of urinary tract infections (UTIs). ObjectiveTo describe the incidence and frequency of symptoms suggestive of UTIs (ssUTIs) for prelubricated versus hydrophilic IUCs. Design, setting, and participantsAn observational study of a patient database compiled by UK general practitioners was conducted. Outcome measurements and statistical analysisThe primary outcome measures were the proportion of patients with at least one ssUTI (prescription of a nonspecific antibiotic with a UTI-related diagnosis, or prescription of a UTI-specific antibiotic) and the mean number of ssUTIs per affected patient in the 12 mo following the index IUC prescription. Comparable prelubricated (“PRELUBE”) and hydrophilic (“HYDRO”) catheter groups were obtained with 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM). Results and limitationsA total of 5296 patients were included (prelubricated: n = 458; hydrophilic: n = 4838). After PSM, the two groups had similar proportions of patients with ssUTIs at baseline. The proportion of patients with ssUTIs during exposure was similar in the PRELUBE (36.9%) and HYDRO groups (41.5%; p = 0.155). However, among patients having used the same type of catheter throughout the exposure period, the proportion with ssUTIs was significantly lower in the PRELUBE group (44.6%, vs 55.0% for HYDRO; p = 0.015), as was the number of ssUTIs per patient (1.3 vs 1.8; p = 0.036). ConclusionsWhen choosing a coated IUC, physicians and patients should not rule out PRELUBE IUCs for safety reasons alone. Patient summaryUsing real-world data compiled by UK general practitioners, we described the incidence and frequency of symptoms suggestive of urinary tract infection in people who were using various types of intermittent urinary catheters. When the same type of prelubricated catheter was used throughout the study period, the incidence of these symptoms was lower than for hydrophilic catheters.