Limpeza periuretral na realização do cateterismo urinário de demora: ensaio clínico randomizado

• Ano de defesa: 2019
• Autor(a) principal: Camila Cláudia Campos
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais; Brasil; ENFERMAGEM - ESCOLA DE ENFERMAGEM; Programa de Pós-Graduação em Enfermagem; UFMG
• Palavras-chave em Português: Cateterismo Urinário; Infecções Urinárias; Água; Clorexidina; Povidona-Iodo; Cuidados de enfermagem; Água/administração & dosagem; Cuidados de Enfermagem
• Link de acesso: http://hdl.handle.net/1843/32499

Indwelling urinary catheterization is a procedure that is used in inpatients and is related to high rates of asymptomatic bacteriuria and urinary tract infection. To prevent these diseases, cleaning the periurethral region prior to catheter insertion is an important approach, reducing the entry of microorganisms from this region through the urethra. Clinical practice guidelines recommend that indwelling urinary catheterization should be performed with aseptic technique, but there is no consensus on which solution is most effective for reducing urinary tract infections. The objective is to evaluate the effect of periurethral cleansing on the incidence of asymptomatic bacteria and urinary tract infections with the use of three solutions (water, soap and 2% aqueous chlorhexidine gluconate; chlorhexidine gluconate 2%, distilled water and 2% aqueous chlorhexidine; and 10% povidone-iodine, distilled water and 1% aqueous povidone-iodine) in adult patients admitted to a tertiary hospital submitted to the indwelling urinary catheterization. This is a two-step research: systematic literature review and randomized clinical trial without researcher's masking. It was performed in a large hospital in Belo Horizonte - MG. The population was composed by inpatients who were eligible to undergo indwelling urinary catheterization. A sample of 28 patients was randomly allocated into groups: soap (n = 11) and antiseptic group (n = 17). Urine cultures were collected at insertion and 24h after. The overall incidence of asymptomatic bacteriuria was 7.14%, on soap group was 9.1% and on antiseptic group was 5.9%. There were no cases of urinary tract infection. Logistic regression showed no statistically significantly differences in the incidence of asymptomatic bacteriuria when cleaned with soap or antiseptic (chlorhexidine or povidone-iodine). A relative risk reduction showed a 36% reduction from acquiring asymptomatic bacteriuria.