Quality
of life of young male catheterized patients
Pramanik S.1,
Paul U.K.2, Pal D.K.3
1Dr. Sandip Pramanik,
Post Doctoral Trainee, Urology Department, IPGMER, Kolkata, West Bengal, 2Dr.
Uttam Kumar Paul, Professor, Department of Medicine, MGM Medical College,
Kishanganj, Bihar, 3Dr. Dilip Kumar Pal, Professor & Head, Urology
Department, IPGMER, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.
Corresponding Author: Dr. Dilip Kumar Pal, Professor & Head, Urology
Department, IPGMER, Kolkata, West Bengal, India. E-mail: urologyipgmer@gmail.com, drdkpal@yahoo.co.in
Abstract
Introduction:
It is pointless to point out that, Per-urethral or Supra-pubic Catheter
compromises the Quality of life (QoL) of young male patients. Our study is
about the comparison of QoL status along with depression of catheterized state
with same after removal of catheter of patients. Objectives: In our study we
wanted to quantify the quality of life (QoL) and distress experienced by
patient following catheterisation and also to assess the improvement of QoL
after catheter removal following surgical intervention. Methods: We used two tools named World
Health Organization Quality of Life scale (WHOQOL BREF) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) for
this purpose. Result: We found
statistically significant improvements in all domains of QoL as measured by
WHOQOL BREF and improvement in depression status as well, measured by Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). Conclusion: As we have documented poor
QoL and depression status in catheterised state and improvement of the same
after catheter removal we recommend counselling of such patients regarding QoL
and Psychiatry consultation for management of depression.
Keywords:
BDI,
Catheterization, WHOQOL BREF, QoL
Author Corrected: 26th October 2018 Accepted for Publication: 30th October 2018
Introduction
Young male patients may present with urinary retention due to various
reasons like urethral stricture disease, bladder neck obstruction, bladder or
urethral stone disease etc. They may require catheterisation if they develop
acute urinary retention. Many of those patients require some form of surgical
intervention for removal of catheter. All these interventions not only affect
the physical, social, sexual and emotional health of patient but also the
immediate family member of patient specially his spouse.
The deterioration of Quality of Life (QoL) in the patients with one
urinary catheter (either per-urethral or supra-pubic) has been documented in
number of studies which we shall be referring to in the following paragraphs.
Ikuerowo
SO et al after their study in Nigeria on 62 patients with urinary catheter for
an Acute Urinary Retention (AUR) and waiting for definitive surgical
interventions concluded that it is a painful experience to have an indwelling
urinary catheter for a considerable period and it is associated with several
side effects also. They did also mention that this catheterized state leads to
negative effect on the QoL of patients on significant amount and financial
burden to government and patients. They suggested few measures such as to
reduce the waiting time for surgery in the intent of reducing the period of
indwelling catheterization [1].
Fumincelli L et al after their study assessing the QoL of
patient on intermittent self catheterization concluded that improvement in the
urinary symptoms, self-confidence, access to work activities, independence as
well as social relationships and social insertion can determine the QoL of
neurogenic bladder patients using intermittent urinary catheterization [2].
Wilde M et al3 after their study on 202 adult
community-living long-term indwelling urinary catheter users has documented
that excess morbidity and health care utilization and costs are attributed to
long term urinary catheter.
In our study we wanted to quantify the quality of life (QoL) distress
experienced by patient following catheterisation and also to assess the
improvement of QoL after catheter removal following surgical intervention.
Materials and Methods
Place
of Study: The study was done at the
Urology department of IPGMER Kolkata, West Bengal, India. Prior approval was
taken from the Institutional Ethical Committee.
Type
of Study: It is a prospective
study.
Period
of Study: From 16th
March 2017 to 15th March 2018
Sampling
Methods: Every young
male catheterized patient (21-40 years) admitted at Urology ward, IPGMER, who
has given consent for the study has been included in the study.
Sample
Collection: QoL
Questionnaire is given to patients following two weeks of per urethral catheter
(PUC) / supra-pubic catheter (SPC) insertion in patients. The patients
undergoing surgical intervention for catheter removal are again administered
QOL questionnaire following 2 weeks of PUC/SPC removal of the patients. We
compared the data of both states by standard statistical analysis. Sample size
was 43. The
patients are assessed for quality of life by using following instruments:
§ Following
2 weeks after catheterization of patient (before any intervention)
o
WHOQOL-BREF [4]
o
BDI (Beck's Depression Inventory)
[5]
§ Following
2 weeks after the patient becomes catheter free (following intervention)
o
WHOQOL-BREF [4]
o
BDI (Beck's Depression Inventory[5]
WHOQOL BREF [4] is an instrument devised by World Health Organisation to
assess the quality of life in human subjects. This
questionnaire is about how the subject feels about his quality of life, health,
or other areas of his life. He has to answer all the questions. If he is unsure
about which response to give to a question, he is instructed to choose the one
which appears most appropriate. There are 26 items and four domains named Domain 1: Physical Health, Domain 2:
Psychological, Domain 3: Social relationships, Domain 4: Environment. Scores
are summed up according to domain and are analysed.
Beck's Depression Inventory is a similar kind of scale measuring depression.
There are 21 questions and the subject has to score each of them. The total
score will tell us the state of depression in the subject. The scoring system
is shown in table 1.
Table-1: (Beck's Depression Inventory Score)
Total Score |
Levels of Depression |
1-10 |
These ups
and downs are normal |
11-16 |
Mild mood disturbance |
17-20 |
Borderline
clinical depression |
21-30 |
Moderate
depression |
31-40 |
Severe
depression |
Over 40 |
Extreme depression |
Inclusion
Criteria: In this prospective study
young male catheterized patients (21-40 years) admitted at Urology ward were
included in the study.
Exclusion
Criteria: Those denying consent and
patients presenting with urinary retention for medical problems were excluded.
Statistical
Methods: Statistical Analysis was performed with help of EPI
INFO (TM) 7.2.2.2.
Results
Statistical Analysis was performed with
help of EPI INFO (TM) 7.2.2.2; EPI INFO is a trademark of the Centres for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Descriptive
statistical analysis was performed to calculate the means with corresponding
standard deviations (S.D.). Test of proportion was used to find the Standard
Normal Deviate (Z) to compare the difference proportions. T-test was used to
compare the means.p<0.05 was taken to be statistically significant.
Analysis of WHOQOL BREF
score at different domains of the patients:
For Domain-1
(Physical Health):
Table-
2: Comparison of WHOQOL BREF score for Domain-I of the patients
Descriptive Statistics |
Raw
Score |
Transformed
Score (4-20) |
Transformed
Score (0-100) |
|||
Catheterized state |
After Catheter removal |
Catheterized state |
After Catheter removal |
Catheterized state |
After Catheter removal |
|
Mean+SD |
15.63±3.27 |
18.95±1.36 |
8.98±1.88 |
10.77±0.68 |
31.28±11.73 |
42.60±4.11 |
Median |
15.00 |
19.00 |
9.00 |
11.00 |
31.00 |
44.00 |
Range |
11 - 21 |
17 - 21 |
6 - 12 |
10 - 12 |
13 - 50 |
38 - 50 |
t-test |
6.15 |
5.85 |
5.97 |
|||
p-value |
<0.0001* |
<0.0001* |
<0.0001* |
T-test showed that the means of all the scores after
the removal of catheter was significantly higher than that of at
catheterised state (p<0.0001). Thus the mean of all the scores after the removal of catheter
significantly increased (Shown in table 2).
For Domain-2
(Psychological health):
Table-3:
Comparison of WHOQOL BREF score for Domain-II of the patients
Descriptive Statistics |
Raw
Score |
Transformed
Score (4-20) |
Transformed
Score (0-100) |
|||
Catheterized
state |
After
Catheter removal |
Catheterized
state |
After
Catheter removal |
Catheterized
state |
After
Catheter removal |
|
Mean+SD |
12.58±3.74 |
15.86±2.03 |
8.81±3.38 |
10.49±1.47 |
27.95±16.16 |
40.65±9.43 |
Median |
12.00 |
16.00 |
8.00 |
11.00 |
25.00 |
44.00 |
Range |
8 - 21 |
14 - 21 |
5 - 17 |
9 - 14 |
6 - 63 |
31 - 63 |
t-test |
5.04 |
2.94 |
4.44 |
|||
p-value |
<0.0001* |
<0.0001* |
<0.0001* |
T-test showed that the means of all the scores after
the removal of catheter was significantly higher than that of at
catheterised state (p<0.001). Thus the mean of all the scores after the removal of catheter
significantly increased (Shown in table 3).
For Domain-3
(Social relationships):
Table-4:
Comparison of WHOQOL BREF score for Domain-III of the patients
Descriptive
Statistics |
Raw Score |
Transformed Score
(4-20) |
Transformed Score (0-100) |
|||
Catheterized state |
After Catheter removal |
Catheterized state |
After Catheter removal |
Catheterized state |
After Catheter removal |
|
Mean+SD |
7.40±1.98 |
8.93±1.30 |
9.86±2.45 |
11.95±1.80 |
36.63±15.15 |
49.74±11.31 |
Median |
7.00 |
9.00 |
9.00 |
12.00 |
31.00 |
50.00 |
Range |
5 - 10 |
7 - 11 |
7 - 13 |
9 - 15 |
19 - 56 |
31 - 69 |
t-test |
4.25 |
4.52 |
4.54 |
|||
p-value |
<0.0001* |
<0.0001* |
<0.0001* |
T-test showed that the means of all the scores after
the removal of catheter was significantly higher than that of at
catheterised state (p<0.0001). Thus the mean of all the scores after the removal of catheter
significantly increased (Shown in table 4).
For Domain-4
(Environment):
Table-5:
Comparison of WHOQOL BREF score for Domain-IV of the patients
Descriptive
Statistics |
Raw Score |
Transformed Score
(4-20) |
Transformed Score (0-100) |
|||
Catheterized state |
After Catheter removal |
Catheterized state |
After Catheter removal |
Catheterized state |
After Catheter removal |
|
Mean+SD |
20.21±2.03 |
21.91±2.95 |
10.37±1.02 |
11.26±1.54 |
40.02±6.44 |
45.63±9.67 |
Median |
20.00 |
21.00 |
10.00 |
11.00 |
38.00 |
44.00 |
Range |
17 - 24 |
17 - 27 |
9 - 12 |
9 - 14 |
31 - 50 |
31 - 63 |
t-test |
3.11 |
3.12 |
3.16 |
|||
p-value |
0.0026* |
0.0025* |
0.0022* |
T-test showed that the means of all the scores after
the removal of catheter was significantly higher than that of at
catheterised state (p<0.01). Thus the mean of all the scores after the removal of catheter
significantly increased (Shown in table 5).
Analysis of total
Beck’s Depression Inventory (BDI) score:
Table-6:
Comparison of total Beck’s Depression Inventory (BDI) score of the patients
Descriptive Statistics |
Catheterized state (n=43) |
After removal of catheter (n=43) |
t-test (t84) |
p-value |
Mean±SD |
28.56±6.17 |
22.51±5.41 |
4.07 |
0.00013* |
Median |
29.00 |
21.00 |
||
Range |
15 - 39 |
15 - 35 |
T-test showed that the mean total BDI score after
the removal of catheter was significantly lower than that of at
catheterised state. (t84 = 4.07;
p=0.0013). Thus the mean total BDI
score after the removal of catheter significantly decreased (Shown in table 6).
Discussion
Wilde M et al [3] have rightly told that there is a need of
more research to find out ways to minimize catheter associated problems in
long-term indwelling catheter users. Information from our study may be of help
in this direction.
Abiola,
O.O.et alin their study based on patient population of south
west Nigeria have commented that the long-standing indwelling urinary catheter
was associated with poor QoL and it was further worsened in younger patients
and QoL was worse in the patients with per-urethral catheters rather than
supra-pubic catheter. Rate of complication was pretty high especially in those
with per-urethral catheters and continuous bladder drainage. Patients according
to their study result had high prevalence of depression and it had a strong
correlation with their QoL. The authors concluded that we need to pay attention
to the QoL of patients with indwelling urinary catheter for a prolonged period
as it is correlated to the severity of depression in those patients [6].
J
R Weese et al have said in their publication that there is shortage of
literatures regarding QoL of spouses of stricture urethra patients in spite of
the fact that there exists a lot of publications regarding quality of life of
stricture urethra patients or patients with catheterized (PUC/SPC) state. They
with help of a unique questionnaire containing 12 questions, assessed the QoL
of family members of urethral stricture patients and concluded that, the
quality of life of family members are negatively impacted by the status of
anterior urethral stricture disease. The setbacks comprise of shrunken social
interactions, interruption of sleep, emotional stress in addition to messed up
sexual intimacy. That’s how the QoL of family members are also affected by the
QoL of patients. This is the reason behind our intent for this study [7].
Another
study tells about a sort of different story. Rebecca
James et al8 documented that a good number of catheterized Multiple Sclerosis
patients had reported negative or positive changes in QoL related to urinary
catheterization. Urinary catheterization did not come out to have a universally
negative impact on patient QoL [8].
Transurethral
resection of prostate (TURP)was linked to note worthy progress in the overall
QOL, as well as urinary symptoms, of patients with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia
(BPH) at 3 months post operatively according to Martin JO’ Sullivan et al [9].
In this study they relied on the Montgomery and Åsberg Depression Rating Scale,
the Mc Gill
Pain Questionnaire, and the QOL questionnaire Short
Form-36 for assessing QoL of patients. A good number of BPH patients have
history of urinary retention leading to PUC insertion. Here lies the importance
of this study in the background of our research. Above findings indirectly
convey similar observations as of ours.
J.D. Lubahn et al [10] concluded
in their study that most of the patients with urethral stricture disease who
are on intermittent self-dilation have expressed moderate difficulty and pain,
and minimal inconvenience while doing self dilatation, but they had reported
poor quality of life. As in our study we are dealing with young male patient
with PUC or SPC in situ and as most of those young males had stricture urethra,
this study has a great relevance in this context. It has reinforced our
findings.
Costa P et al [11] has acknowledged
in their article that Quality of life (QoL) may
be severely affected in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) and resulting
urinary difficulties (UD). They had ventured into validation of a questionnaire to measure the
QoL of SCI patients with urinary catheter or urinary difficulties. This study indeed
supports the need of our study, although in an indirect manner.
Schober J.P et al [12] had concluded in their study that there exists a
considerable amount of anxiety and depression amongst patients of stricture
urethra and following corrective surgeries there is a documented decreased
quantum of anxiety and depression. They go over the fact that, a urethral
stricture disease specific questionnaire is needed to further illuminate the
interplay of urethral stricture disease with anxiety and depression. This study
also scaffolds our background and indirectly supports our findings as most of
the stricture urethra patients have either per urethral or supra pubic catheter
inserted in their urinary bladder.
Lucas ET et al [13]
have stated that significant improvements in urinary symptoms and in quality of
life occur after urethroplasty and they are correlated with objective measures.
They also reinforce and support to establish our findings regarding improvement
of QoL after catheter removal in young male catheterised patients.
In our study we compared patients’ QoL and depression
status in catheterized state and after catheter removal and we got sort of
similar findings as we witnessed statistically significant improvement in QoL
in all domains measured by WHOQOL BREF and there was statistically significant
improvement in depression status also after catheter removal.
Conclusion
Substantial
poor QoL and significant depression status in catheterised state and
statistically significant improvement of the QoL as well as Depression status
after catheter removalhave been observed. Counselling of such patients
regarding QoL and Psychiatry consultation for management of depression may be
deemed necessary. It is further recommended that counselling of their spouses
or caregivers may be needed as the disease process puts considerable impact on
their lives also. Study on QoLof spouses or caregivers of these patients may
also be planned to objectively observe the same.
Contribution
by different authors
a) First
Author: Research Idea, Data Collection, Literature Search, Statistical
Analysis, Writing of Manuscript
b) Second Author: Literature Search, Guidance to
First Author in Statistical Analysis and in Writing of Manuscript
c) Third Author (Corresponding Author): Research
Idea, Guidance to First Author in Data Collection, Literature Search,
Statistical Analysis, Correspondence to Editor for Publication
What
does this study add to existing knowledge?: This study has
quantified the QoL and Depression status of young male catheterised patients
and has documented significant improvement of the same after catheter removal.
It also has irked question in our mind regarding the need of study of QoL,
Depression and Anxiety status of the spouses or caregivers of these patients
which we were able to find very few in present literature.
Conflicts of Interest: No conflicts of interest.
References
1.
Ikuerowo SO, Ogunade AA, Ogunlowo TO, et al. The burden of prolonged
indwelling catheter after acute urinary retention in Ikeja - Lagos,
Nigeria. BMC Urol. 2007 Sep 26; 7:16. DOI:10.1186/1471-2490-7-16
2.
Fumincelli L, Mazzo A, Martins JCA, Henriques FMD, Orlandin L. Quality of life
of patients using intermittent urinary catheterization. Revista
Latino-Americana de Enfermagem. 2017; 25:e2906. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/
10.1590/1518-8345.1816.2906.[pubmed]
3.
Wilde MH, McDonald MV, Brasch J, et al. Long-term urinary catheter
users self-care practices and problems. J Clin Nurs. 2013
Feb;22(3-4):356-67. doi: 10.1111/jocn.12042.[pubmed]
4.
Skevington SM, Lotfy M, O'Connell KA; WHOQOL Group. The World Health
Organization's WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment: psychometric
properties and results of the international field trial. A report from
the WHOQOL group. doi: 10.1023/B:QURE.0000018486.91360.00.[pubmed]
5. Beck AT, Ward CH, Mendelson M, et al. An inventory for measuring depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1961 Jun;4:561-71.[pubmed]
6. Abiola, O.O. &
Ogunwobi, Olorunfemi & Williams-Abiola Oyeronke, Titilope & Ayeni
Shola, Christopher & Adeniyi Segun, Oladele. Quality of life and prevalence
of depressive symptoms among patients on prolonged indwelling urinary
catheters: A study from South west, Nigeria. International Journal of Medicine
and Medical Sciences.2016; 8. 96-104.
7. Weese JR, Raup VT,
Eswara JR, Marshall SD, Chang AJ, Vetter J, et al. Anterior urethral structure
disease negatively impacts the quality of life of family members. Advances
Urology. 2016; 20; 16-20.
8. Rebecca James, Heidi E. Frasure, and Sangeeta T. Mahajan. Urinary Catheterization May Not Adversely Impact Quality of Life in Multiple Sclerosis Patients. ISRN Neurology, vol. 2014, Article ID 167030, 4 pages, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/167030.[pubmed]
9.
Martin JO’ Sullivan AFRCSI, Colette Murphy (FFARCSI), Conor Deasy
MB, Gabrielle Iohom (FFARCSI), Eamon A Kiely (FRCSI), George Shorten
(FFARCSI). Effects of transurethral resection of prostate on the
quality of life of patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Journal
of the American College of Surgeons. Volume 198, Issue 3, March 2004,
394-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2003.10.016
10.
Lubahn JD, Zhao LC, Scott JF, et al. Poor quality of life in patients
with urethral stricture treated with intermittent self-dilation. J
Urol. 2014 Jan;191(1):143-7. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.06.054. Epub 2013
Jun 29.[pubmed]
11.
Costa P, Perrouin-Verbe B, Colvez A, et al. Quality of life in spinal
cord injury patients with urinary difficulties. Development and
validation of qualiveen. Eur Urol. 2001 Jan;39(1):107-13.
DOI:10.1159/000052421
12.
Schober JP, Stensland KD, Breyer BN, et al. Effect of Urethroplasty on
Anxiety and Depression. J Urol. 2018 Jun;199(6):1552-1556. doi:
10.1016/j.juro.2018.01.074. Epub 2018 Feb 3.[pubmed]
13. Lucas ET, Koff WJ,
Rosito TE, Berger M, Bortolini T, Silva B. Assessment of satisfaction and
Quality of Life using self - reported questionnaires after urethroplasty: a
prospective analysis. International
Brazilian Journal of Urology : official journal of the Brazilian Society of
Urology. 2017;43(2):304-310. doi:10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2016.0207.
How to cite this article?
Pramanik S, Paul U.K, Pal D.K. Quality of life of young male catheterized patients. Int J Med Res Rev 2018; 6(07):372- 377. doi:10.17511/ijmrr.2018.i07.06.