An observational study in Urinary Catheters, Bladder Pain and Discomfort and Urine Leakage, sponsored by The Flume Catheter Company Ltd. Recruiting at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-09-13.
Sponsored by The Flume Catheter Company Ltd · Observational
The Flume catheter is a commercially available (FDA 510(k) cleared) urethral catheter with an innovative catheter design. The traditional Foley catheter design includes a protruding tip with drainage holes. The protruding tip may contribute to patient discomfort, pain and bladder spasms. The Flume catheter is designed such that the balloon envelops the tip on inflation, thus eliminating the protruding catheter tip, while the drainage holes are inset low in the balloon, providing protection to the bladder lining. Based on the change in design, the hypothesis of this observational cohort study is the Flume catheter will have better patient comfort scores (using validated patient reported outcomes measures) when compared to a traditional catheter.
Background:
Urethral catheters function to drain the urinary bladder when medically indicated or when individuals are unable to empty their bladder by other means. This potential benefit of urinary drainage is balanced by substantial risks of the presence of a urinary catheter in the bladder. While much of the current literature focuses on Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (CAUTI), patients experience substantial pain and discomfort as well. For example, in a cohort of 2000 participants, 50% reported pain or discomfort from the catheter, 20% experienced bladder spasms, and 40% experienced restricted activity1. These non-infectious complications create a substantial burden and decrement in quality of life when a catheter is required.
Rationale:
The Flume catheter is a commercially available catheter (FDA 510(k) cleared) with an innovative catheter design (figure 2). The traditional Foley catheter design includes a protruding tip with drainage holes, which clinically creates edema and disruption of the urothelial lining of the bladder. This protruding tip may also contribute to patient discomfort, pain, and bladder spasms. The Flume catheter is designed such that the balloon envelops the tip on inflation, thus eliminating the protruding catheter tip, while the drainage holes are inset low in the balloon, providing protection to the bladder lining. Based on this change in design, it is plausible that patients may experience less irritation of the urinary bladder, with a concomitant decrease in pain, discomfort, and bladder spasms. The study described herein seeks to compare patient comfort with a traditional catheter vs a Flume catheter.
Flume Catheter Comfort Study is a prospective, observational cohort study comparing patient-reported measures of comfort between the innovative Flume catheter design and the traditional catheter typically used by study participants. Only chronic catheter participants who receive catheter exchanges every 30 days are eligible to participate. As such, a pre-post study design (baseline and 30 day follow up) will allow for individual patients to act as their own control group pre- and post-Flume catheter insertion.
235 studies on the registry are indexed under Urinary Retention; 39 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 41 is below the median of 108 across 42 observational studies indexed under Urinary Retention.
Browse Urinary Retention studies →This is the only study on the registry with The Flume Catheter Company Ltd as lead sponsor.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Participants with a clinical indication for exchange of an indwelling (long term) urethral catheter will be screened for participation based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Participants will be enrolled at Penn State Medical Center Urology Clinics. We anticipate that the participants enrolled will be representative of the general population presenting to the participating clinic for long-term catheter care. Based on our power calculations for the analysis population, we will assume a 25% dropout rate so we will enroll 41 participants with the expectation only 34 will complete and be eligible to be included in the analysis population.
Exclusion Criteria:
Change in patient reported outcomes--Total Neurogenic Bladder Symptom Score Short Form
Patient reported outcomes will be collected and compared at two time points using the validated Neurogenic Bladder Symptom Score short form. Scores for the Total Neurogenic Bladder Symptom Score Short Form can range from 0-28, with 0 being the best and 28 being the worst.
Time frame: Baseline and 30 day follow-up
Change in patient reported outcomes--Neurogenic Bladder Symptom Score Short Form incontinence domains
Patient reported outcomes will be collected and compared at two time points using the validated Neurogenic Bladder Symptom Score short form. Scores for the incontinence domain of the Neurogenic Bladder Symptom Score short form can range from 0 to 12, with 0 being the best and 12 being the worst.
Time frame: Baseline and 30 day follow-up
Change in patient reported outcomes--Neurogenic Bladder Symptom Score Short Form quality of life domains
Patient reported outcomes will be collected and compared at two time points using the validated Neurogenic Bladder Symptom Score short form. Scores for the quality of life section of the Neurogenic Bladder Symptom Score Short Form domain can range from 0 to 4, with 0 being the best and 4 being the worst.
Time frame: Baseline and 30 day follow-up
Change in patient reported outcomes--applicable Genitourinary pain index instrument questions
Patient reported outcomes will be collected and compared at two time points using the applicable portions of the Genitourinary pain index instrument. The Genitourinary pain index instrument scores can range from 0 to 31, with 0 being the best and 31 being the worst
Time frame: Baseline and 30 day follow-up
Plan to share: No
Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.
Contact study teamGet an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.