Is Standard Urine Bag or Urofix? Which is More Usefull in Surgical Nursing Care? Accuracy of Urine Output Monitoring

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorYıldız, Tülin
dc.contributor.authorYazıcı, Cenk Murat
dc.contributor.authorTürker, Polat
dc.contributor.authorÖnler, Ebru
dc.contributor.authorMalak, Arzu
dc.contributor.authorEren, Elif
dc.date.accessioned2022-05-11T14:02:44Z
dc.date.available2022-05-11T14:02:44Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.departmentYüksekokullar, Sağlık Yüksekokulu, Hemşirelik Bölümü
dc.departmentFakülteler, Tıp Fakültesi, Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri Bölümü, Üroloji Ana Bilim Dalı
dc.departmentMeslek Yüksekokulları, Sağlık Hizmetleri Meslek Yüksekokulu, Sağlık Bakım Hizmetleri Bölümü
dc.description.abstractObjective: The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the accuracy of urine output measurement performed by standard urine bags and urofix. Methods: This is a prospective study conducted at a 22-bed urology unit. Urine volume was measured either by a standard urine bag or urofix, verified by scaled container measurements in patients dressed with urinary catheter and expected to stay with it for 24 hours or more. In total, 1048 measurements were obtained for 131 patients. Results: The difference between median, maximum and minimum values of urine volumes from the scaled container and nurse’s forecast was evaluated for each of 4 measurements. When the urine volume was measured with the standard urine bag, the average volume was 550 cc in the first measurement while it was 300 cc with urofix. Mean values for the second, third and fourth measurements with standard urine bag and urofix were as follows respectively; 590 cc and 335 cc, 500 cc and 300 cc, 600 cc and 300 cc. The difference was statistically significant in all measurements (p<0.001). Conclusion: In this study, urofix was the most reliable method for measuring urine output and fluid management. Furthermore, if the patient has a standard urine bag, it is recommended to confirm the urine output with a scaled container.
dc.identifier.doi10.33808/clinexphealthsci.597753
dc.identifier.endpage427
dc.identifier.issn2459-1459
dc.identifier.issn2459-1459
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.startpage423
dc.identifier.trdizinidTkRjeU16WXhNUT09
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.33808/clinexphealthsci.597753
dc.identifier.urihttps://app.trdizin.gov.tr/makale/TkRjeU16WXhNUT09
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11776/4464
dc.identifier.volume10
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000604683100015
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/A
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakTR-Dizin
dc.institutionauthorYıldız, Tülin
dc.institutionauthorYazıcı, Cenk Murat
dc.institutionauthorTürker, Polat
dc.institutionauthorÖnler, Ebru
dc.institutionauthorMalak, Arzu
dc.institutionauthorEren, Elif
dc.language.isoen
dc.relation.ispartofClinical and Experimental Health Sciences
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.titleIs Standard Urine Bag or Urofix? Which is More Usefull in Surgical Nursing Care? Accuracy of Urine Output Monitoring
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket
Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
Küçük Resim
İsim:
4464.pdf
Boyut:
346.83 KB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Açıklama:
Tam Metin / Full Text
İndir

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Sağlık Hizmetleri Meslek Yüksekokulu
Sağlık Yüksekokulu Koleksiyonu
Tıp Fakültesi Koleksiyonu
TR-Dizin İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu