Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
British Journal of Infection Control
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Frimodt-Møller, N.
Right arrow Articles by Corneliussen, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

In vitro test of different urine-meters in an experimental bladder-drainage model: prevention of ascending contamination depends on construction of the urine-meter

N. Frimodt-Møller

National Center of Antimicrobials and Infection Control, Statens Serum Institut, Artillerivej 5, 2300 Copenhagen S

L. Corneliussen

National Center of Antimicrobials and Infection Control, Statens Serum Institut, Artillerivej 5, 2300 Copenhagen S.

Modern urine-meters are provided with the urine collection bag directly attached to the measuring device, thus providing a closed collection system. The systems vary, however, in respect to how the measuring devices are emptied into the urine collection bag. Using an in vitro ascending contamination model we compared three systems: the Unometer (Unomedical), the Bard Urinemeter and the Curity Urinemeter (Kendall), which all differ in the methods of emptying. The urine collection bags were inoculated with Pseudomonas aeruginosa , and subsequently sampled daily at six different sites for up to seven days in order to determine the degree and timing of ascending contamination of the systems. Unometer was significantly less contaminated at the urine-meter level at day seven than both Bard (0/8 vs. 4/4, P=0.002) and Curity (0/8 vs. 8/8, P=0.0002), respectively, as well as significantly less contaminated in the infusion-catheter above the urine-meter at day seven than Bard (0/8 vs. 4/4, P= 0.002), but not so as compared to Curity (0/8 vs. 1/8, P =1,0). The Bard and Curity systems empty the devices by tilting thereby probably contaminating the devices, while the Unometer is emptied via a non-return valve in the bottom of the device.

Key Words: Urine-meter • urinary tract infection • catheter

British Journal of Infection Control, Vol. 6, No. 5, 14-17 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/14690446050060050501


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?