Taskinen Seppo, Fagerholm Riitta, Ruutu Mirja
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Hospital for Children and Adolescents, Helsinki University Hospital, Stenbäckinkatu 11, 00290 Helsinki, Finland.
J Pediatr Urol. 2008 Oct;4(5):367-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2008.02.002. Epub 2008 Mar 24.
To evaluate patient experience of hydrophilic catheters used for clean intermittent catheterization (CIC).
Out of 107 consecutive patients on a CIC programme, 100 filled in a questionnaire concerning the hydrophilic catheters they were using for CIC.
Sixty-four out of 100 patients were females and 83 had a neurogenic reason for CIC. The programme was started at median age 4 (range 0-32) years. The handling and sliding properties of the catheters were usually good, although 26% felt that the hydrophilic catheters were too slippery in the hands and 11% felt some sticking during catheter removal. Catheter packages got the most criticism. Pain experiences were rare, although 87 performed CIC through the urethra. In general, there were no differences between brands of catheter (LoFric (Astratech) vs Easi/SpeediCath (Coloplast)), although the patients had preferences.
Patients have individual preferences, although the technical properties of hydrophilic catheters are in general quite good and similar. As CIC treatment is demanding, the patient is justified in selecting the best catheter for them.
