Technology for managing incontinence: What are the research priorities?

Incontinence and toileting difficulties can often be successfully addressed by treating their underlying causes. However, (complete) cure is not always possible and continence products to prevent or contain unresolved leakage or to facilitate toileting are in widespread use. Many people use them successfully but identifying the product(s) most likely to meet individual needs can be challenging and the recently published Seventh International Consultation on Incontinence includes a chapter which draws on the literature to provide evidence-based recommendations to help clinicians and product users to select appropriate products. This paper is based on the same evidence, but reviewed from the different perspective of those keen to identify unmet needs and develop improved products. For each of the main continence product categories it (i) outlines the design approach and key features of what is currently available; (ii) provides a generic functional design specification; (iii) reviews how well existing products meet the requirements of their main user groups; and (iv) suggests priorities for the attention of product designers. It also flags some core scientific problems which - if successfully addressed - would likely yield benefits in multiple incontinence product contexts.

Experiences and impact of living with incontinence associated stigma: A protocol for a systematic review and narrative synthesis of qualitative studies.

INTRODUCTION: Incontinence is global health and social issue, with urinary incontinence alone affecting over 400 million people. Incontinence can lead to physical harms such as skin damage, but it also commonly causes social and psychological harms, including those associated with stigma. For many people, treatment to cure incontinence does not work or is not suitable and they live with the long-term consequences of incontinence. At the moment, no stigma reduction interventions (increasingly used with other conditions such as mental health problems and HIV) have been developed for people living with incontinence. As a starting point for developing such an intervention, this review will address the questions 1) What are the incontinence (urinary or faecal) associated experiences of stigma of people living with incontinence? 2) What is the impact of incontinence associated stigma on their lives? METHODS: The reviewers will search Embase, Medline, PsychINFO and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature using controlled vocabulary and relevant search terms. Articles assessed to meet inclusion criteria will be included. Once duplicates have been removed, titles and abstracts will be screened and full texts of selected research articles will be reviewed. An adapted Joanna Briggs Institute Data Extraction Form will be used to collect the data and quality will be assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for qualitative research appraisal tool. A framework approach (using the Revised Framework for Understanding Non-communicable Disease Related Stigma) will be used to organise, integrate, interpret and summarise findings from included articles. The review will be reported in accordance with the Enhancing Transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research statement. Prospero registration number CRD42021259065. DISCUSSION: The systematic review described in this protocol will provide the first in-depth, comprehensive understanding of people's experiences of the stigma associated with incontinence and the impact that it has on their lives. It will identify broader influences of contextual variables such as age, sex, cause and type of incontinence, socio-economic culture and geographical location. The review aims to provide insights to support the development of incontinence associated stigma reduction interventions.

A qualitative study of continence service provision for people living with dementia at home in the UK: Still inadequate?

INTRODUCTION: Incontinence is a major problem for people with dementia (PWD) and their family/friend caregivers, often causing substantial harm, including residential care admission. The incontinence needs of PWD are complex and different from those of people without dementia. The aim of this study was to investigate carer and nurse perceptions of continence service provision and potential improvements. METHODS: A secondary analysis of qualitative data was undertaken. Semi-structured interviews (n = 45) were undertaken with PWD, family caregivers and healthcare professionals (continence or dementia nurses) in the UK. PWD and caregivers were recruited via www.joindementiaresearch.nihr.ac.uk and via dementia/carer groups. Nurses were recruited via their employers. Framework analysis was used. The COREQ Research guideline statement assists reporting. RESULTS: Four themes were found. Firstly, there was a lack of awareness of the service and waiting time. Many caregivers were unaware of continence services and dementia nurses often viewed it as a pad provision service. Caregivers reported long waits not meeting their urgent needs. Secondly, product provision was often inadequate. Most caregivers self-purchased all or many products and substantial variation in product provision was found. The number of products provided was often inadequate. Thirdly, a sense that "nothing can be done" was observed by some nurses and caregivers. Caregivers believed that, if nothing else, care information should be provided. Finally, suggestions for improvements were made, including proactive service signposting, joint clinics with dementia services, improved information before crisis point, dementia training for continence nurses and improved product provision. CONCLUSION: Continence service inadequacies for PWD and caregivers have been reported for many years. This study demonstrates service provision remains unsatisfactory in the UK. Stakeholders propose a range of service improvements. It highlights that listening to the voices of PWD, caregivers and nurses is crucial for services seeking to improve continence services for PWD living at home.

Innovating urinary catheter design: An introduction to the engineering challenge.

Every day, people around the world rely on intermittent and indwelling urinary catheters to manage bladder dysfunction, but the potential or actual harm caused by these devices is well-recognised. Current catheter designs can cause urinary tract infection and septicaemia, bladder and urethral trauma and indwelling devices frequently become blocked. Furthermore, the devices can severely disrupt users' lives, limiting their daily activities and can be costly to manage for healthcare providers. Despite this, little significant design innovation has taken place in the last 80 years. In this article current catheter designs and their limitations are reviewed, common catheter-associated problems are outlined and areas of design ripe for improvement proposed. The potential to relieve the individual and economic burden of catheter use is high.

Performance characteristics of a methodology to quantify adverse events over time in hospitalized patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the performance characteristics of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Global Trigger Tool (GTT) to determine its reliability for tracking local and national adverse event rates. DATA SOURCES: Primary data from 2008 chart reviews. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study in a stratified random sample of 10 North Carolina hospitals. Hospital-based (internal) and contract research organization-hired (external) reviewers used the GTT to identify adverse events in the same 10 randomly selected medical records per hospital in each quarter from January 2002 through December 2007. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION: Interrater and intrarater reliability was assessed using κ statistics on 10 percent and 5 percent, respectively, of selected medical records. Additionally, experienced GTT users reviewed 10 percent of records to calculate internal and external teams' sensitivity and specificity. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Eighty-eight to 98 percent of the targeted 2,400 medical records were reviewed. The reliability of the GTT to detect the presence, number, and severity of adverse events varied from κ=0.40 to 0.60. When compared with a team of experienced reviewers, the internal teams' sensitivity (49 percent) and specificity (94 percent) exceeded the external teams' (34 and 93 percent), as did their performance on all other metrics. CONCLUSIONS: The high specificity, moderate sensitivity, and favorable interrater and intrarater reliability of the GTT make it appropriate for tracking local and national adverse event rates. The strong performance of hospital-based reviewers supports their use in future studies.