Use of “closed” urinary drainage systems in septic patients in intensive care

Abstract

The so-called “open” and “closed” urinary drainage systems in patients in intensive care are compared in order to evaluate the cost/benefit ratio in preventing urinary infections. 523 patients were studied; 120 were catheterised with the “open” system, 403 with the “closed” system. The “squared X” test was used for statistical comparisons, with Yates’ continuity correction. In the “open” system group, 70% of patients became infected, a statistically significant result (p<0.05). The higher cost of the “closed” drainage system would seem to be compensated by the fact that the catheter remains in situ for 10-14 days, unless there are complications, while infections are fewer and there is a saving on specific drugs and hospitalisation times.