BACKGROUND: Catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) are detrimental to health and are largely preventable with adherence to CAUTI prevention guidelines. Patient and family engagement in CAUTI prevention is often encouraged in these guidelines; however, little is known about how this engagement is operationalized in practice. A systematic review was conducted to synthesize the content, format, and outcomes of interventions that engage patients and/or families in CAUTI prevention. METHODS: Two reviewers independently screened records from four databases up to March 2021 and searched reference lists of final articles. Included articles were primary research, tested an intervention, involved indwelling urinary catheters, and described at least one patient and/or family engagement method. Articles were appraised for quality using the Downs and Black checklist. RESULTS: After 720 records were screened, 12 were included. Study quality ranged from good to poor, scoring lowest in internal validity. The most common formats of patient/family engagement were flyers/handouts (83.3%) and verbal education (58.3%). Common content areas were urinary catheter care and maintenance strategies. Most study outcomes (83.3%) measured CAUTI rates, and half measured patient/family-related outcomes. Improvements were seen in at least one outcome across all studies, but less than half (41.7%) showed statistically significant results. CONCLUSION: The researchers found that most interventions lacked sufficient detail on the content, delivery, and/or outcome measurement of patient/family engagement, which limits transferability. More high-quality, generalizable trials are warranted in this area. Future research should focus on integrating publicly available resources into practice that can be tested for comprehension and revised based on feedback from target audiences.
BACKGROUND: Catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) are detrimental to health and are largely preventable with adherence to CAUTI prevention guidelines. Patient and family engagement in CAUTI prevention is often encouraged in these guidelines; however, little is known about how this engagement is operationalized in practice. A systematic review was conducted to synthesize the content, format, and outcomes of interventions that engage patients and/or families in CAUTI prevention. METHODS: Two reviewers independently screened records from four databases up to March 2021 and searched reference lists of final articles. Included articles were primary research, tested an intervention, involved indwelling urinary catheters, and described at least one patient and/or family engagement method. Articles were appraised for quality using the Downs and Black checklist. RESULTS: After 720 records were screened, 12 were included. Study quality ranged from good to poor, scoring lowest in internal validity. The most common formats of patient/family engagement were flyers/handouts (83.3%) and verbal education (58.3%). Common content areas were urinary catheter care and maintenance strategies. Most study outcomes (83.3%) measured CAUTI rates, and half measured patient/family-related outcomes. Improvements were seen in at least one outcome across all studies, but less than half (41.7%) showed statistically significant results. CONCLUSION: The researchers found that most interventions lacked sufficient detail on the content, delivery, and/or outcome measurement of patient/family engagement, which limits transferability. More high-quality, generalizable trials are warranted in this area. Future research should focus on integrating publicly available resources into practice that can be tested for comprehension and revised based on feedback from target audiences.
Authors: Elizabeth D Cox; Gwen C Jacobsohn; Victoria P Rajamanickam; Pascale Carayon; Michelle M Kelly; Tosha B Wetterneck; Paul J Rathouz; Roger L Brown Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Mary H Wilde; James M McMahon; Margaret V McDonald; Wan Tang; Wenjuan Wang; Judith Brasch; Eileen Fairbanks; Shivani Shah; Feng Zhang; Ding-Geng Din Chen Journal: Nurs Res Date: 2015 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.381
Authors: Shelley S Magill; Jonathan R Edwards; Wendy Bamberg; Zintars G Beldavs; Ghinwa Dumyati; Marion A Kainer; Ruth Lynfield; Meghan Maloney; Laura McAllister-Hollod; Joelle Nadle; Susan M Ray; Deborah L Thompson; Lucy E Wilson; Scott K Fridkin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-03-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Allison S Letica-Kriegel; Hojjat Salmasian; David K Vawdrey; Brett E Youngerman; Robert A Green; E Yoko Furuya; David P Calfee; Rimma Perotte Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-02-21 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Cecelia N Theobald; Matthew J Resnick; Thomas Spain; Robert S Dittus; Christianne L Roumie Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 2.038