Moseley C B
Department of Health Care Administration, University of Nevada, Las Vegas 89154-3023, USA.
Am J Med Qual. 1996 Winter;11(4):222-6. doi: 10.1177/0885713X9601100411.
The 1990 Omnibus Budget and Reconciliation Act (OBRA) nursing home regulations limit the use of indwelling urinary catheterization to certain appropriate cases. This study examines the impact of OBRA on catheterization among 3149 pre-OBRA and 5073 post-OBRA Virginia residents. The two cohorts were similar in activities of daily living function and medical status, but the post-OBRA cohort was more incontinent. A higher percentage of residents were catheterized pre-OBRA than post-OBRA. Post-OBRA, catheterized residents were more likely to meet OBRA conditions for appropriate catheterization than noncatheterized residents, and less than 1% of long-term catheterized residents were catheterized inappropriately. Long-term catheterized residents had more urinary tract infections than short-term catheterized residents, however. Also, some nursing homes may substitute ostomies for catheters. Catheter use may no longer be a reliable indicator of quality of care at the nursing home level, if homes are minimizing catheterization in response to OBRA.
1990年《综合预算协调法案》(OBRA)中的疗养院规定将留置导尿术的使用限制在某些适当的病例中。本研究调查了OBRA对弗吉尼亚州3149名OBRA实施前居民和5073名OBRA实施后居民导尿情况的影响。这两组人群在日常生活功能和医疗状况方面相似,但OBRA实施后的人群尿失禁情况更严重。OBRA实施前接受导尿的居民比例高于实施后。在OBRA实施后,接受导尿的居民比未接受导尿的居民更有可能符合OBRA规定的适当导尿条件,长期接受导尿的居民中不当导尿的比例不到1%。然而,长期接受导尿的居民比短期接受导尿的居民更容易发生尿路感染。此外,一些疗养院可能用造口术替代导尿管。如果疗养院因应OBRA尽量减少导尿,那么在疗养院层面,导尿管的使用可能不再是护理质量的可靠指标。