- Tara Lamont, special adviser 1,
- Simon Harrison, consultant urologist 2,
- Sukhmeet Panesar, clinical adviser1,
- Michael Surkitt-Parr, joint head of patient safety (response) 1
- 1National Patient Safety Agency, London W1T 5HD, UK
- 2Pinderfields Hospital, Wakefield, UK
- Correspondence to: T Lamont tara.lamont{at}npsa.nhs.uk
Suprapubic catheters are used when urethral catheterisation is not possible or desirable because of, for example, urethral stricture, prostatic enlargement, or urethral trauma.1 In some cases the procedure may be carried out as an emergency on the ward. Elective indications include postoperative drainage after lower urinary tract or bowel surgery and the management of the neuropathic bladder. Many patients with conditions such as multiple sclerosis and spinal cord injury use long term suprapubic catheter drainage, to simplify catheter management and minimise risks of urethral damage.
Anecdotal evidence suggests that a typical hospital will carry out more than 100 suprapubic catheterisations each year. The doctors who undertake suprapubic catheterisation may lack experience: unless they are urologists, they may rarely perform the procedure. Suprapubic catheterisation is often delegated to junior medical staff.
The procedure involves passing a urinary catheter directly into the bladder through the lower abdominal wall, sometimes guided by ultrasound. Most are done safely, but important risks associated with catheter insertion include haemorrhage and infection of the urine or catheter track, and serious complication from intestinal injury. Bowel damage can lead to fatal peritonitis and is a particular risk in patients with contracted bladders that fail to distend sufficiently for safe catheter passage and in those with adhesions from previous lower abdominal surgery tethering bowel loops to the lower abdominal wall.
From September 2005 to June 2009, staff in England and Wales reported three deaths and seven cases of severe harm relating to insertion of suprapubic catheters. A further 249 incidents related to problems in suprapubic catheter use. Complications are likely to be under-reported, given 30 day mortality rates, in relatively small studies, ranging from 0.82 to 1.8.3
A typical incident report reads: “Patient underwent insertion …
Sign in
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10
Published 16 May 2012
Re: Outcomes of elective induction of labour compared with expectant management: population based study
Published 16 May 2012
Re: Outcomes of elective induction of labour compared with expectant management: population based study
Published 16 May 2012
Re: Why the US healthcare system is failing, and what might rescue it
Published 16 May 2012
Re: Risk of cardiovascular serious adverse events associated with varenicline use for tobacco cessation: systematic review and meta-analysis
Published 16 May 2012
Most responses
Is spending on proton beam therapy for cancer going too far, too fast? (11 responses)
Published 17 Apr 2012 - 23:32
What are the benefits of an early diagnosis? (8 responses)
Published 18 Apr 2012
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (8 responses)
Published 2 May 2012
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21