SpringerLink
Log in

Prevalence and Cost of Catheters to Manage Neurogenic Bladder

  • Neurogenic Bladder (Charles Powell, S. Editor)
  • Published:
Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

In this review, we examine the current literature to address the epidemiology of catheters for managing neurogenic bladder. We will address the epidemiology of conditions associated with neurogenic bladder, including multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, Parkinson’s disease, stroke, and spina bifida. Rates of utilization of various catheter strategies, including indwelling urethral catheter, suprapubic catheter, and intermittent catheterization rates will be reviewed. Lastly, we examine the cost considerations between and within each type of strategy.

Recent Findings

Management strategies for neurogenic bladder have evolved overtime. Costs between catheter strategies are largely driven by complications. The highest cost variation within each strategy is related to the technique and type of intermittent catheter. Recently, there has been an increase in costlier single-use intermittent catheter strategies. However, the short- and long-term benefits of these strategies remained understudied.

Summary

Without comparative studies highlighting improvements in complication rates and compliance, the benefits of single-use catheters for intermittent catheterization are largely theoretical. Until such studies are performed, providers should strongly consider managing neurogenic bladder patients with reusable intermittent catheters in order to provide the most cost-conscious care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Ramagopalan SV, Sadovnick AD. Epidemiology of multiple sclerosis. Neurol Clin. 2011;29(2):207–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Koch-Henriksen N, Sorensen PS. The changing demographic pattern of multiple sclerosis epidemiology. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9(5):520–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. DasGupta R, Fowler CJ. Bladder, bowel and sexual dysfunction in multiple sclerosis: management strategies. Drugs. 2003;63(2):153–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. McGuire EJ, Savastano JA. Urodynamic findings and long-term outcome management of patients with multiple sclerosis-induced lower urinary tract dysfunction. J Urol. 1984;132(4):713–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wintner A, Kim MM, Bechis SK, Kreydin EI. Voiding dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. Semin Neurol. 2016;36(1):34–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Betts CD, D’Mellow MT, Fowler CJ. Urinary symptoms and the neurological features of bladder dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1993;56(3):245–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. McKinley WO, Jackson AB, Cardenas DD, DeVivo MJ. Long-term medical complications after traumatic spinal cord injury: a regional model systems analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80(11):1402–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lasfargues JE, Custis D, Morrone F, Carswell J, Nguyen T. A model for estimating spinal cord injury prevalence in the United States. Paraplegia. 1995;33(2):62–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Burney RE, Maio RF, Maynard F, Karunas R. Incidence, characteristics, and outcome of spinal cord injury at trauma centers in North America. Arch Surg. 1993;128(5):596–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Manack A, Motsko SP, Haag-Molkenteller C, Dmochowski RR, Goehring EL Jr, Nguyen-Khoa BA, et al. Epidemiology and healthcare utilization of neurogenic bladder patients in a US claims database. Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30(3):395–401.

  11. Ginsberg D. The epidemiology and pathophysiology of neurogenic bladder. Am J Manag Care. 2013;19(10 Suppl):s191–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kaplan SA, Chancellor MB, Blaivas JG. Bladder and sphincter behavior in patients with spinal cord lesions. J Urol. 1991;146(1):113–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Weld KJ, Dmochowski RR. Association of level of injury and bladder behavior in patients with post-traumatic spinal cord injury. Urology. 2000;55(4):490–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Agrawal M, Joshi M. Urodynamic patterns after traumatic spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med. 2015;38(2):128–33.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Jankovic J, Sherer T. The future of research in Parkinson disease. JAMA Neurol. 2014;71(11):1351–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pringsheim T, Jette N, Frolkis A, Steeves TD. The prevalence of Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Mov Disord. 2014;29(13):1583–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Calabrese VP. Projected number of people with Parkinson disease in the most populous nations, 2005 through 2030. Neurology 2007;69(2):223–224; author reply 4.

  18. Chapple CR, Wein AJ, Abrams P, Dmochowski RR, Giuliano F, Kaplan SA, et al. Lower urinary tract symptoms revisited: a broader clinical perspective. Eur Urol. 2008;54(3):563–9.

  19. Araki I, Kitahara M, Oida T, Kuno S. Voiding dysfunction and Parkinson’s disease: urodynamic abnormalities and urinary symptoms. J Urol. 2000;164(5):1640–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Unger CA, Tunitsky-Bitton E, Muffly T, Barber MD. Neuroanatomy, neurophysiology, and dysfunction of the female lower urinary tract: a review. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2014;20(2):65–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Benjamin EJ, Blaha MJ, Chiuve SE, Cushman M, Das SR, Deo R, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2017 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2017;135(10):e146–603.

  22. Feigin VL, Forouzanfar MH, Krishnamurthi R, Mensah GA, Connor M, Bennett DA, et al. Global and regional burden of stroke during 1990-2010: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet. 2014;383(9913):245–54.

  23. Nakayama H, Jorgensen HS, Pedersen PM, Raaschou HO, Olsen TS. Prevalence and risk factors of incontinence after stroke. The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Stroke. 1997;28(1):58–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Badlani G. Urologic problems in cerebrovascular accidents. Probl Urol. 1993;41

  25. Khan Z, Starer P, Yang WC, Bhola A. Analysis of voiding disorders in patients with cerebrovascular accidents. Urology. 1990;35(3):265–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Centers for Disease C, Prevention. Racial/ethnic differences in the birth prevalence of spina bifida - United States, 1995-2005. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2009;57(53):1409–13.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Shin M, Besser LM, Siffel C, Kucik JE, Shaw GM, Lu C, et al. Prevalence of spina bifida among children and adolescents in 10 regions in the United States. Pediatrics. 2010;126(2):274–9.

  28. Marshall DF, Boston VE. Does the absence of anal reflexes guarantee a “safe bladder” in children with spina bifida? Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2001;11(Suppl 1):S21–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. de Jong TP, Chrzan R, Klijn AJ, Dik P. Treatment of the neurogenic bladder in spina bifida. Pediatr Nephrol. 2008;23(6):889–96.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Lapides J, Diokno AC, Silber SJ, Lowe BS. Clean, intermittent self-catheterization in the treatment of urinary tract disease. J Urol. 2017;197(2S):S122–S4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Consortium for Spinal Cord M. Bladder management for adults with spinal cord injury: a clinical practice guideline for health-care providers. J Spinal Cord Med. 2006;29(5):527–73.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Abrams P, Agarwal M, Drake M, El-Masri W, Fulford S, Reid S, et al. A proposed guideline for the urological management of patients with spinal cord injury. BJU Int. 2008;101(8):989–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Stohrer M, Blok B, Castro-Diaz D, Chartier-Kastler E, Del Popolo G, Kramer G, et al. EAU guidelines on neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction. Eur Urol. 2009;56(1):81–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Cameron AP, Wallner LP, Tate DG, Sarma AV, Rodriguez GM, Clemens JQ. Bladder management after spinal cord injury in the United States 1972 to 2005. J Urol. 2010;184(1):213–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Afsar SI, Yemisci OU, Cosar SN, Cetin N. Compliance with clean intermittent catheterization in spinal cord injury patients: a long-term follow-up study. Spinal Cord. 2013;51(8):645–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Yavuzer G, Gok H, Tuncer S, Soygur T, Arikan N, Arasil T. Compliance with bladder management in spinal cord injury patients. Spinal Cord. 2000;38(12):762–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Bellucci CH, Castro Filho JE, Gomes CM, Bessa Junior J, Battistella LR, Souza DR, et al. Contemporary trends in the epidemiology of traumatic spinal cord injury: changes in age and etiology. Neuroepidemiology. 2015;44(2):85–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Nijendijk JH, Post MW, van Asbeck FW. Epidemiology of traumatic spinal cord injuries in the Netherlands in 2010. Spinal Cord. 2014;52(4):258–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. • Krebs J, Wollner J, Pannek J. Bladder management in individuals with chronic neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction. Spinal Cord. 2016;54(8):609–13. This reference provided an updated epidemiology of bladder management patterns with respect to type of neurologic dysfunction. Rates of catheterization technique were examined in a large heterogenous population of chronic neurogenic bladder patients. Individuals at risk of indwelling catheterization were identified based on female gender, age, injury severity and injury duration.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Groah SL, Weitzenkamp DA, Lammertse DP, Whiteneck GG, Lezotte DC, Hamman RF. Excess risk of bladder cancer in spinal cord injury: evidence for an association between indwelling catheter use and bladder cancer. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83(3):346–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Esclarin De Ruz A, Garcia Leoni E, Herruzo Cabrera R. Epidemiology and risk factors for urinary tract infection in patients with spinal cord injury. J Urol. 2000;164(4):1285–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Cardenas DD, Hooton TM. Urinary tract infection in persons with spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1995;76(3):272–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Larsen LD, Chamberlin DA, Khonsari F, Ahlering TE. Retrospective analysis of urologic complications in male patients with spinal cord injury managed with and without indwelling urinary catheters. Urology. 1997;50(3):418–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Hollingsworth JM, Rogers MA, Krein SL, Hickner A, Kuhn L, Cheng A, et al. Determining the noninfectious complications of indwelling urethral catheters: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2013;159(6):401–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Foxman B, Barlow R, D'Arcy H, Gillespie B, Sobel JD. Urinary tract infection: self-reported incidence and associated costs. Ann Epidemiol. 2000;10(8):509–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Saint S. Clinical and economic consequences of nosocomial catheter-related bacteriuria. Am J Infect Control. 2000;28(1):68–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Gift TL, Owens CJ. The direct medical cost of epididymitis and orchitis: evidence from a study of insurance claims. Sex Transm Dis. 2006;33(10 Suppl):S84–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Perrouin-Verbe B, Labat JJ, Richard I, Mauduyt de la Greve I, Buzelin JM, Mathe JF. Clean intermittent catheterisation from the acute period in spinal cord injury patients. Long term evaluation of urethral and genital tolerance. Paraplegia. 1995;33(11):619–24.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Santucci RA, Joyce GF, Wise M. Male urethral stricture disease. J Urol. 2007;177(5):1667–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Ord J, Lunn D, Reynard J. Bladder management and risk of bladder stone formation in spinal cord injured patients. J Urol. 2003;170(5):1734–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Jamison J, Maguire S, McCann J. Catheter policies for management of long term voiding problems in adults with neurogenic bladder disorders. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;11:CD004375.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Weld KJ, Dmochowski RR. Effect of bladder management on urological complications in spinal cord injured patients. J Urol. 2000;163(3):768–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Willson M, Wilde M, Webb ML, Thompson D, Parker D, Harwood J, et al. Nursing interventions to reduce the risk of catheter-associated urinary tract infection: part 2: staff education, monitoring, and care techniques. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2009;36(2):137–54.

  54. Hooton TM, Bradley SF, Cardenas DD, Colgan R, Geerlings SE, Rice JC, et al. Diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of catheter-associated urinary tract infection in adults: 2009 International Clinical Practice Guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2010;50(5):625–63.

  55. Saint S, Elmore JG, Sullivan SD, Emerson SS, Koepsell TD. The efficacy of silver alloy-coated urinary catheters in preventing urinary tract infection: a meta-analysis. Am J Med. 1998;105(3):236–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Saint S, Veenstra DL, Sullivan SD, Chenoweth C, Fendrick AM. The potential clinical and economic benefits of silver alloy urinary catheters in preventing urinary tract infection. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160(17):2670–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Jahn P, Preuss M, Kernig A, Seifert-Huhmer A, Langer G. Types of indwelling urinary catheters for long-term bladder drainage in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;3:CD004997.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Talja M, Korpela A, Jarvi K. Comparison of urethral reaction to full silicone, hydrogen-coated and siliconised latex catheters. Br J Urol. 1990;66(6):652–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Pickard R, Lam T, MacLennan G, Starr K, Kilonzo M, McPherson G, et al. Antimicrobial catheters for reduction of symptomatic urinary tract infection in adults requiring short-term catheterisation in hospital: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;380(9857):1927–35.

  60. Hackler RH. Long-term suprapubic cystostomy drainage in spinal cord injury patients. Br J Urol. 1982;54(2):120–1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Feifer A, Corcos J. Contemporary role of suprapubic cystostomy in treatment of neuropathic bladder dysfunction in spinal cord injured patients. Neurourol Urodyn. 2008;27(6):475–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. MacDiarmid SA, Arnold EP, Palmer NB, Anthony A. Management of spinal cord injured patients by indwelling suprapubic catheterization. J Urol. 1995;154(2 Pt 1):492–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. O’Brien WM. Percutaneous placement of a suprapubic tube with peel away sheath introducer. J Urol. 1991;145(5):1015–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Flock WD, Litvak AS, McRoberts JW. Evaluation of closed suprapubic cystostomy. Urology. 1978;11(1):40–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Lance L. Goetz L Droste, Adam P. Klausner and Diane K. Newman. Catheters used for intermittent catheterization. In: Springer, editor. Clinical application of urologic catheters, devices and products 2018. p. 44–77.

  66. Bermingham SL, Hodgkinson S, Wright S, Hayter E, Spinks J, Pellowe C. Intermittent self catheterisation with hydrophilic, gel reservoir, and non-coated catheters: a systematic review and cost effectiveness analysis. BMJ. 2013;346:e8639.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. Silbar EC, Cicmanec JF, Burke BM, Bracken RB. Microwave sterilization: a method for home sterilization of urinary catheters. J Urol. 1989;141(1):88–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Bogaert GA, Goeman L, de Ridder D, Wevers M, Ivens J, Schuermans A. The physical and antimicrobial effects of microwave heating and alcohol immersion on catheters that are reused for clean intermittent catheterisation. Eur Urol. 2004;46(5):641–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Goetz LL, Klausner AP. Strategies for prevention of urinary tract infections in neurogenic bladder dysfunction. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2014;25(3):605–618, viii.

  70. Lavallee DJ, Lapierre NM, Henwood PK, Pivik JR, Best M, Springthorpe VS, et al. Catheter cleaning for re-use in intermittent catheterization: new light on an old problem. SCI Nurs. 1995;12(1):10–2.

  71. Kurtz MJ, Van Zandt K, Burns JL. Comparison study of home catheter cleaning methods. Rehabil Nurs 1995;20(4):212–214, 7.

  72. Lamin E, Newman DK. Clean intermittent catheterization revisited. Int Urol Nephrol. 2016;48(6):931–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. •• Prieto JA, Murphy C, Moore KN, Fader MJ. Intermittent catheterisation for long-term bladder management (abridged cochrane review). Neurourol Urodyn. 2015;34(7):648–53. These recent references revisited the debate between the merits of single-use catheters that were made in a recent Cochrane review article. By reanalyzing Cochrane review data, (after data correction), no difference was found between single- versus multiple-use of catheters with respect to UTI–53.

  74. •• Christison K, Walter M, Wyndaele JJM, Kennelly M, Kessler TM, Noonan VK, et al. Intermittent catheterization: the devil is in the details. J Neurotrauma. 2018; These recent references revisited the debate between the merits of single-use catheters that were made in a recent Cochrane review article. By reanalyzing Cochrane review data, (after data correction), no difference was found between single- versus multiple-use of catheters with respect to UTI.

  75. De Ridder DJ, Everaert K, Fernandez LG, Valero JV, Duran AB, Abrisqueta ML, et al. Intermittent catheterisation with hydrophilic-coated catheters (SpeediCath) reduces the risk of clinical urinary tract infection in spinal cord injured patients: a prospective randomised parallel comparative trial. Eur Urol. 2005;48(6):991–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Hudson E, Murahata RI. The ‘no-touch’ method of intermittent urinary catheter insertion: can it reduce the risk of bacteria entering the bladder? Spinal Cord. 2005;43(10):611–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Mandal AK, Vaidyanathan S. Management of urethral stricture in patients practising clean intermittent catheterization. Int Urol Nephrol. 1993;25(4):395–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Waller L, Telander M, Sullivan L. The importance of osmolality in hydrophilic urethral catheters: a crossover study. Spinal Cord. 1997;35(4):229–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Vaidyanathan S, Soni BM, Dundas S, Krishnan KR. Urethral cytology in spinal cord injury patients performing intermittent catheterisation. Paraplegia. 1994;32(7):493–500.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Oh SJ, Ku JH, Jeon HG, Shin HI, Paik NJ, Yoo T. Health-related quality of life of patients using clean intermittent catheterization for neurogenic bladder secondary to spinal cord injury. Urology. 2005;65(2):306–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Hagen EM, Rekand T. Management of bladder dysfunction and satisfaction of life after spinal cord injury in Norway. J Spinal Cord Med. 2014;37(3):310–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. KC Moore ML, Robinson E, Bagulay N, Pearce I. Cleaning and re-using intermittent self catheters: a questionnaire to gauge patient’s perceptions and prejudices. J Clin Urol. 2014;7(4):277–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Division of Urology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 8635 West 3rd Street, Suite 1070W, Los Angeles, CA, 90048, USA

    Devin N. Patel & Jennifer T. Anger

  2. David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Christopher Gonzalez Alabastro

Authors
  1. Devin N. Patel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christopher Gonzalez Alabastro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jennifer T. Anger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Devin N. Patel.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Neurogenic Bladder

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Patel, D.N., Alabastro, C.G. & Anger, J.T. Prevalence and Cost of Catheters to Manage Neurogenic Bladder. Curr Bladder Dysfunct Rep 13, 215–223 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11884-018-0483-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11884-018-0483-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation