TY - JOUR
T1 - Caregiver and Health Care Provider Satisfaction with Volumetric Bladder Ultrasound
AU - Baumann, Brigitte M.
AU - McCans, Kathryn
AU - Stahmer, Sarah A.
AU - Leonard, Mary B.
AU - Shults, Justine
AU - Holmes, William C.
PY - 2007/10
Y1 - 2007/10
N2 - Objectives: Conventional (nonimaged) bladder catheterization has lower first-attempt success rates (67%-72%) when compared with catheterization aided by volumetric bladder ultrasonography (US) (92%-100%), yet the total time to urine sample collection with US can be quite lengthy. Given the advantage and disadvantages, the authors assessed caregiver and health care provider satisfaction with these two methods. Methods: Caregivers and health care providers of children enrolled in a prospective, randomized, controlled trial examining the first-attempt urine collection success rates with these two methods completed standardized questionnaires. Each child's caregiver, nurse, and physician noted their perceptions, satisfaction, and future preferences using Likert-scale assessments. Results: Of 93 caregivers, 45 had children randomized to the conventional arm and 48 to the US arm. Nine physicians and three nurses participated. Both caregiver groups had similar previous catheterization experience; none had children undergo volumetric bladder sonography. Caregivers in the conventional group rated their children's discomfort higher (4.4 vs. 3.4; p = 0.02) and were less satisfied (4.5 vs. 6.4; p < 0.0001) than those in the US group. Nurses' satisfaction with catheterization in the conventional group was lower than in the US group (3.0 vs. 5.5), as was physicians' satisfaction (4.3 vs. 5.7; p < 0.0001). Both nurses and physicians indicated that they would be less likely to use conventional catheterization in future attempts. Conclusions: Caregivers in the conventional group rated their children's discomfort higher than did caregivers in the US group. Both caregivers and health care providers expressed greater satisfaction with US and were more likely to prefer this imaging modality with future catheterization attempts.
AB - Objectives: Conventional (nonimaged) bladder catheterization has lower first-attempt success rates (67%-72%) when compared with catheterization aided by volumetric bladder ultrasonography (US) (92%-100%), yet the total time to urine sample collection with US can be quite lengthy. Given the advantage and disadvantages, the authors assessed caregiver and health care provider satisfaction with these two methods. Methods: Caregivers and health care providers of children enrolled in a prospective, randomized, controlled trial examining the first-attempt urine collection success rates with these two methods completed standardized questionnaires. Each child's caregiver, nurse, and physician noted their perceptions, satisfaction, and future preferences using Likert-scale assessments. Results: Of 93 caregivers, 45 had children randomized to the conventional arm and 48 to the US arm. Nine physicians and three nurses participated. Both caregiver groups had similar previous catheterization experience; none had children undergo volumetric bladder sonography. Caregivers in the conventional group rated their children's discomfort higher (4.4 vs. 3.4; p = 0.02) and were less satisfied (4.5 vs. 6.4; p < 0.0001) than those in the US group. Nurses' satisfaction with catheterization in the conventional group was lower than in the US group (3.0 vs. 5.5), as was physicians' satisfaction (4.3 vs. 5.7; p < 0.0001). Both nurses and physicians indicated that they would be less likely to use conventional catheterization in future attempts. Conclusions: Caregivers in the conventional group rated their children's discomfort higher than did caregivers in the US group. Both caregivers and health care providers expressed greater satisfaction with US and were more likely to prefer this imaging modality with future catheterization attempts.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34548752833&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34548752833&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1197/j.aem.2007.06.041
DO - 10.1197/j.aem.2007.06.041
M3 - Article
C2 - 17898252
AN - SCOPUS:34548752833
SN - 1069-6563
VL - 14
SP - 903
EP - 907
JO - Academic Emergency Medicine
JF - Academic Emergency Medicine
IS - 10
ER -