[Home ] [Archive]    
Main Menu
Home::
Journal Information::
Articles archive::
For Authors::
For Reviewers::
Publishing Policies::
Contact us::
Site Facilities::
Webmail::
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
Last site contents
:: Review Policies
:: Volume 4, Issue 14 (12-2009) ::
IJNR 2009, 4(14): 23-28 Back to browse issues page
Comparing the effects of water vs. povidone-iodine solution for periurethral cleaning prior to urinary catheterization on bacteriuria
Khadijeh Nasiriani * , Zohre Kalani , Farahnaz Farnia , Monireh Motevasselian , Mahmod Mohammadzadeh , Fatemeh Behnaz , Fatemeh Nasiriani
, nasiriani@gmail.com
Abstract:   (24204 Views)

Introduction: Urinary catheterization is a common procedure in the care and

Methods:

hospitalized women drawn from gynecology unit of Shaheed Sadoughi Hospital in

Yazd. They were selected through random sampling, and were allocated in two groups.

After registering the participants’ demographic data, the urine culture samples were sent

to laboratory. The samples with more than 10

microorganisms were recorded. All statistics were computed by the SPSS software data.

A clinical trial study design was carried out with a sample of 603 bacteriuria were recognized and the

Results:

20% using water and 16.7% using povidone -iodine solution. The difference between

the groups wasn’t significant (

were Stafilococco aureo (6.65%), escherichia coli (10%), Enterococcus (3.35%) and

in povidone -iodine solution group were gram positive cocci (3.35%), estafilococo

(3.35%), streptococ (3.35%) and escherichia coli (6.65%) which weren’t significantly

different (

Overally, 18.3% of the participants had shown bacteriuria which wasP=0.5). The contributor microorganisms in water groupP=0.5).

Conclusions:

between groups. It seemed that using povidone -iodine solution didn’t reduce the rate

of bacteriuria more than water. As applying water has no side effects and is more

beneficial economically, it could be recommended for peri urethral cleaning prior to

urinary catheterization in short term.

The findings indicated that there were no significant differences

 

treatment of hospitalized patients and bacteriuria is associated with complications and

decreased quality of healthcare services. Applying any safe and cost benefit action to

reduce or prevent it is of great importance which using the antiseptic solutions, is one

of them. It seems that doing the procedure with clean method alike to sterile method is

safe and using water is preferred to antiseptic solutions due to economical reasons,

availability, and not having side effects. The present study was therefore conducted to

compare the effects of water vs. povidone -iodine solution for periurethral cleaning

prior to urinary catheterization on bacteriuria.

Keywords: Water, Povidone-iodine solution, Bactriuria, Periurethral cleaning
Full-Text [PDF 161 kb]   (40 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Maternity Nursing | Subject: nursing
Received: 2009/03/16 | Published: 2009/12/15
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA


XML   Persian Abstract   Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

nasiriani K, kalani Z, farnia F, motevasselian M, mohammadzadeh M, behnaz F et al . Comparing the effects of water vs. povidone-iodine solution for periurethral cleaning prior to urinary catheterization on bacteriuria. IJNR 2009; 4 (14) :23-28
URL: http://ijnr.ir/article-1-156-en.html


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 4, Issue 14 (12-2009) Back to browse issues page
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.05 seconds with 37 queries by YEKTAWEB 4645