What nursing interventions would you use when caring for urinary retention?

Alessandra Mazzo, 1 José Carlos Amado Martins, 2 Beatriz Maria Jorge, 3 Rui Carlos Negrão Batista, 4 Rodrigo Guimarães dos Santos Almeida, 3 Fernando Manuel Dias Henriques, 5 Verónica Rita Dias Coutinho, 4 and Isabel Amélia Costa Mendes 6

Alessandra Mazzo

1PhD, Professor, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, PAHO/WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil

Find articles by Alessandra Mazzo

José Carlos Amado Martins

2PhD, Professor, Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

Find articles by José Carlos Amado Martins

Beatriz Maria Jorge

3Doctoral student, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, PAHO/WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil

Find articles by Beatriz Maria Jorge

Rui Carlos Negrão Batista

4PhD, Adjunct Professor, Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

Find articles by Rui Carlos Negrão Batista

Rodrigo Guimarães dos Santos Almeida

3Doctoral student, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, PAHO/WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil

Find articles by Rodrigo Guimarães dos Santos Almeida

Fernando Manuel Dias Henriques

5MSc, Professor, Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

Find articles by Fernando Manuel Dias Henriques

Verónica Rita Dias Coutinho

4PhD, Adjunct Professor, Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

Find articles by Verónica Rita Dias Coutinho

Isabel Amélia Costa Mendes

6PhD, Full Professor, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, PAHO/WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil

Find articles by Isabel Amélia Costa Mendes

Disclaimer

1PhD, Professor, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, PAHO/WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil

2PhD, Professor, Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

3Doctoral student, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, PAHO/WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil

4PhD, Adjunct Professor, Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

5MSc, Professor, Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

6PhD, Full Professor, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, PAHO/WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil

Corresponding Author: Alessandra Mazzo Universidade de São Paulo. Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto Departamento de Enfermagem Geral e Especializada Av. Bandeirantes, 3900 Bairro: Monte Alegre CEP: 14040-902, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brasil E-mail: rb.psu.pree@ozzama

Received 2014 Jul 3; Accepted 2015 Mar 5.

Copyright notice

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License

Abstract

Objective:

to validate an instrument to measure self-confidence of nursing care in urinary retention.

Methods:

methodological research study, carried out after ethical approval. A Likert-like scale of 32 items related to nursing care in urinary retention was applied to students of the graduate nursing course. For instrument validation, analysis of the sample adequacy and main components, Varimax orthogonal rotation and internal consistency analyses were developed.

Results:

in a sample of 305 students, there was high correlation of all items with the total scale and Cronbach's alpha of 0.949. The scale items were divided into five factors with internal consistency: Factor 1 (0.890), Factor 2 (0.874), Factor 3 (0.868), Factor 4 (0.814) and Factor 5 (0.773), respectively.

Conclusion:

the scale meets the validity requirements, demonstrating potential for use in evaluation and research.

Keywords: Urinary Retention, Nursing, Trust, Urinary Catheterization

Introduction

Urinary Retention (UR) is defined as the accumulation of urine in the bladder that occurs due to the inability of this organ to void. The triggering factors of this problem may be related to obstruction of the urethra, motor and sensory changes, anxiety, drug effects, among others, often leading to the development of feelings of discomfort, increased sensitivity of the pubic symphysis and restlessness. In severe cases of UR, the patient collects more than 2,000ml of urine in the bladder due to the loss of secondary bladder tone or excessive stretching of the detrusor muscle fibers, which can lead to hypertonicity of the bladder, Urinary Tract Infections (UTI) and even the formation of kidney stones( - ).

The different aspects that involve nursing care in UR are part of the nurse and patient's daily clinical reality. In this matter, there are various possibilities for interventions, among which the most common are highlighted, such as the human and material resources; clinical evaluation measures, comfort, hygiene and performing of urinary catheterization, although not always carried out based on the best scientific evidence( - ).

In the procedures related to clinical assessment of the patient with UR, the clinical history data collection and physical examination of the patient's bladder are emphasized.

The physical examination of the bladder is based on inspection, palpation and percussion, which are intended to identify texture changes, thickness, consistency, sensitivity, volume and hardness of the organ( ). It is a simple procedure, which may be characterized as extremely complex, since it involves subjectivity of the examiner, changes in the operational and clinical conditions of the patient (for example, changes due to the use of drugs and patient age)( ). Therefore, the use of portable bladder ultrasound is required, to be carried out with greater safety and precision.

The portable bladder ultrasound is a noninvasive method that allows the professional to diagnose the UR, evaluate the volume of urine in the bladder (pre- and/or post-voiding) and safely and with good level of confidence, opt for performing or not the urinary catheterization( - ). However, the equipment is not widely used in clinical practice.

Urinary catheterization is one of the most common procedures of nursing care in urinary retention. It should be performed by nurses, with accuracy and scientific knowledge, transposing myths and practical rituals. When performed improperly or because it is an invasive intervention, it can lead to several complications, among which stand out the Urinary Tract Infection (UTI), urethral trauma, pain and wrong urinary path( - , ).

In this complex context, as in many other aspects of nursing care to the patient, capable and confident professionals are necessary so that nursing care in UR is performed with quality and safety to the patient.

Self-confidence is the possibility that an individual has to demonstrate belief in the success, capabilities and skills, in a given context( ). It must be achieved with wisdom, experience, success, support and training and, to be maintained, persistence, self-awareness and positive thinking are needed. As a result, it leads to stability of autonomy and positive results( ).

Self-confidence is related to self-efficacy. It is the degree of conviction and success for achieving a result, acting decisively in the mode of action, behavior, organization, thought patterns and emotional reactions( - ). It is a measure of self-perception and belief in one's own abilities( ).

In nursing care for UR, nurses need to feel secure and confident regarding to their activities, generating a level of confidence for the patient and the health team, which positively compromises care( ). Therefore, it is essential to invest in personal qualification programs to develop the necessary attributes, focusing on knowledge weaknesses and professional training. Therefore, it is necessary to use instruments that aim for the evaluation procedures and target these actions.

In this context, this study aims to validate a self-confidence scale of nursing care in urinary retention.

Method

This is a methodological research study, carried out with students from the 4th and final year of the graduate nursing course of a public university of Portugal.

The Ethics Committee of the Unit of Research in Health-Nursing Sciences of the Nursing School of Coimbra (P 129-12/2012) and the National Research Ethics Commission in Brazil (CONEP 505.722/2013) approved the study. The students were invited to participate in the study. The anonymity and voluntary participation were maintained. A Free Informed Consent Form (IC) was used.

All 305 students invited were part of the sample, establishing a relation of 9.5 participants per item of the scale under consideration( ).

For the development of the instrument, previous studies addressing nursing care in urinary eliminations( - , ) were used and a theoretical framework that deals with self-confidence( - ). Based on this material, a list of items was constructed called Self-Confidence Scale of Nursing Care in Urinary Retention (EAAERU).

The EAAERU consists of a list of 32 statements for which the respondent expresses his/her opinion in a Likert-like questionnaire of 5 points, in which (1) represents not confident, (2) little confident, (3) confident, (4) very confident and (5) completely confident. The list was constructed and validated, regarding its appearance and content, by researchers from Brazil and Portugal, according to the new Portuguese orthography and spelling rules. An inter-rater agreement index of 70.0% was considered. There was no disagreement among the participants on any item of the instrument in this process.

After obtaining the data, a database was developed using SPSS, version 22.

To determine the validity and reliability of the construct, descriptive statistics with central trend and dispersion (mean, mode, median, percentiles, variance, standard deviation) measures were used to characterize the sample and statistical inference (factor analysis and estimate of internal consistency). For the evaluation of the results, p <0.05 was assumed as statistically significant.

Results

Among the 305 respondents, 268 (87.9%) started the graduation course in 2009. The mean age was 22.1 years, ranging between 21 and 40 years. Most students (77.7%) were between 21 and 22 years old, with a standard deviation of 2.40. As to gender, 42 (13.8%) were men and 263 (86.2%) were women.

With regard to previous experiences of students with the subject addressed, 270 (88.5%) reported to have already performed evaluation of patients with urinary retention, 34 (11.1%) never performed and one (0.3%) did not answer. As for performing urinary catheterization, 301 (98.7%) reported that they had performed the procedure, three (1.0%) had never performed it and one (0.3%) did not answer.

The EAAERU scale

The scale showed a good suitability database, with a ratio of 9.5:1, with respect to the number of cases and its relationship with the quantity of variables.

Good linear association among the variables (with 68.0% of the correlations above 0.30) was observed by the use of the correlation matrix.

The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy test showed good adequacy of the sample for analysis( ), with a value of 0.936. Bartlett's test of sphericity achieved statistically significant values with X2=5690.762 and p<0.001, which indicated the existence of relations among the variables that were expected to be included.

The anti-image matrix corroborates the sample suitability of each variable for using factor analysis, by presenting high values on the diagonal that range from 0.884 ("estimate by palpation the volume of urine in the bladder") to 0.967 ("fix the catheter as needed"), which suggests the inclusion of all variables for factor analysis.

To achieve the factors of the EAAERU, a factor analysis of the main components was carried out among the 32 items of the instrument, using the method of main components and Varimax orthogonal rotation.

After analysis and observation of the Scree Plot, it was possible to identify the proposed division of the items in four or five factors. Taking into account the construct, the sample size, the factor analysis, the Scree Plot convergence and the scale interval of five factors explained 61.0% of the variance. Therefore, it was decided to maintain the division of the scale into five factors, in the final analysis.

As shown in Table 1, after defining the five factors, the proportion of variance of each variable was verified, which were explained by the extracted components (commonalities) and factor loadings of each item. Due to the sample size, it was decided to keep the items with factor loading superior to 0.40( ).

Table 1

- Correlation matrix of the items of the factors rotated by Varimax, with Keiser normalization for five factors (N = 305). Coimbra, Portugal, 2014

ItemsFactors12345Listen the complaint0.535Evaluate the patient ...0.720Palpate the bladder0.717Estimate, by palpation....0.735Decide on the catheterization0.527Material... intimate hygiene0.4070.520Material... procedure0.4100.588Communicate...0.669Obtain consent ....0.610Ensure privacy....0.688Ensure biosafety ...0.673Perform handwashing0.764Perform personal hygiene ...0.746Open the material0.680Define the level of aseptic ...0.580Perform antisepsis of the perineum0.539Decide whether or not lubricating ...0.410Inserting the probe ...0.536Define the length ...0.568Collection bag ...0.509Intervene there is no drainage ...0.686Intervene there is hematuria ...0.659Decide resistance to progression ...0.739Fix the catheter ...0.495Intervene... if there is disconnection ...0.557Perform the urine collection ...0.592Evaluate the urine volume ...0.449Evaluate ... collection bag0.651Decide when to remove catheter0.552Give destination to the material ...0.757Register ...0.719Evaluation of patient after ...0.683

Open in a separate window

After carrying out the rotation and in view of a satisfactory factor solution, meanings were attributed to factors( - ). Thus, the EAAERU was divided into five factors, with the factor (composed by the 8 items 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 29) being called "interventions performed during urinary catheterization and/or in iatrogenic situations, "the factor 2 (composed by seven items: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16) and being called "Prior interventions to performing urinary catheterization", the factor 3 (composed by seven items: 24 26, 27, 28, 30, 31, 32) and called "Interventions performed for urinary catheters", the factor 4 (composed by six items: 1, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 17) and called "Communication, consent and preparation of materials for performing urinary catheterization" and the factor 5 (composed by four items: 2, 3, 4 and 5) and called "Objective evaluation of UR".

Regarding the analysis of the set of items that compose the EAAERU and its relationship with the construct, through the alpha Cronbach's test (Table 2), thereby testing the proposed items and their mutual correlation, high correlation of all items with the full scale was achieved, resulting in a high alpha value (0.949). It was found that all items contributed to the good alpha coefficient, undermining the scale if either of them is eliminated.

Table 2

- Statistics of homogeneity of the items and Cronbach's internal consistency coefficient of the EAAERU in its entirety (N=305). Coimbra, Portugal, 2014

ItemsAverageStandard DeviationCorrelation with the Total (adjusted)Alpha if the item is removed14.420.6620.4560.94923.620.6450.4820.94933.840.7600.5080.94942.770.8780.3990.95053.390.7710.6100.94864.520.5980.5960.94874.540.5900.6580.94784.280.6570.5650.94894.300.6670.5260.948104.710.4870.4720.949114.450.6020.5470.948124.830.3970.5180.949134.650.5350.5890.948144.600.5990.6600.947154.430.6380.6130.948164.400.6700.6820.947174.400.7360.6100.948184.180.7310.7090.947193.960.7890.6390.947204.150.7700.6390.947213.410.8710.6260.948223.310.8390.6630.947233.290.8160.6180.948244.230.7070.6560.947253.970.7870.6580.947264.050.7550.5770.948273.960.8660.5280.949284.330.7100.6740.947293.800.8350.6910.947304.550.6280.6390.947314.490.6150.6390.947324.340.6540.7030.947

Open in a separate window

After analysis of the global coefficient, the coefficients of the EAAERU with each dimension remained high, indicating good consistency. Cronbach's alpha values were: Factor 1 (0.890), Factor 2 (0.874), Factor 3 (0.868), Factor 4 (0.814) and Factor 5 (0.773).

Due to the impossibility of applying the EAAERU in an entirely new sample, dividing the sample into two sub-samples (sample A and sample B) was considered, which were obtained by randomization feature of the samples, provided by SPSS. In all subsamples analyzed, the tests performed on this sample were replicated and similar results were found with regard to the reliability of the scale (Cronbach's alpha of subsample A was of 0.944 and of 0.951 for subsample B), considered a good correlation and division of the scale into five factors.

The descriptive results of the EAAERU are shown in Table 3.

Table 3

- Descriptive statistics for each dimension and the total scale. Coimbra, Portugal, 2014

Factor 1Factor 2Factor 3Factor 4Factor 5Average3.764.584.284.403.40Median3.754.714.284.503.50Mode4.005.004.864.833.75Standard Deviation0.6060.4300.5320.4710.592Variance1.633.002.712.831.25Minimum5.005.005.005.005.00Maximum3.764.584.284.403.408Percentiles253.374.284.004.163.00503.754.714.284.503.50754.255.004.714.833.75

Open in a separate window

Discussion

Urinary elimination is one of the basic needs of individuals( ), often affected in the processes of health/disease, which makes it one of the focuses of nursing interventions. In the proceedings on urinary elimination problems, one of the nursing diagnoses commonly found is the Urinary Retention.

In many nursing work contexts( ), which includes nursing care in Urinary Retention, interventions should be performed with quality, safety and comfort, both for the patient and the professional. It is achieved by incorporating updated scientific and technical knowledge and the best scientific evidence into clinical practice, which leads to the constant need for training of professionals as well as scientific update of educational institutions focused on their training.

Well-trained professionals will be more confident and efficient, better performing their functions, with less stress, greater motivation, persistence and expectation of success( ). The failure can cause discouragement and obstacles to achieve objectives. In this sense, it is necessary to know the possibilities and limitations for the development of new skills and new achievements( ).

In this context, due to the need and the lack of an instrument to investigate and evaluate the confidence of nurses in nursing care of Urinary Retention, the EAAERU was proposed. After the construct validation, a high correlation of all items with the total scale was observed with a good reliability index (alpha=0.949), indicating that the scale measures the self-confidence of nursing care in urinary retention.

By means of factor analysis and statistical support, it was possible to identify the division of the scale into five factors, represented by 1) "Interventions performed during urinary catheterization and/or iatrogenic situations", 2) "Previous interventions to performing urinary catheterization" 3) "Interventions performed after urinary catheterization"; 4) "Communication, consent and preparation of materials for performing urinary catheterization" and 5) "Objective evaluation of UR", which showed good reliability indices, contributing to internal consistency. The factor that showed the lowest reliability index is composed of few items (2, 3, 4 and 5) and had an objective assessment of UR (Cronbach's alpha of 0.773).

The descriptive values of the sample showed that students were more confident in carrying out measures related to communication, consent, preparation of the material, patient and professional (factor 2, factor 4) and after catheter removal (factor 3) and less confident regarding the problem situations and in the objective assessment of UR (factor 1 and factor 5). These results corroborate the studies of several authors, which points out the difficulties of the objective assessment of UR and problem factors related to trauma to catheter insertion for delayed urinary catheterization as the main difficulties presented by the professionals( ). These findings stimulate the incorporation of scientific evidence into clinical practice and use of existing and little disseminated technological resources, such as the portable ultrasound of bladder.

The fact that the validation of EAAERU initially has been accomplished in one Portuguese-speaking country only can be mentioned as a limiting factor, although it has been developed according to the new orthography and spelling rules, and adopted by professionals from Portuguese-speaking countries. It is considered that the developed instrument can be applied to professionals. However, it is recommended that statistical tests be repeated during the process, since the validation process occurred with the final-year students of the nursing graduate course, mostly with experience in the subject.

Conclusion

The use of consistent instruments that enable the assessment of nursing professionals, aiming at the better targeting of training processes, is extremely important in the clinical practice of nurses, since they stimulate and incorporate scientific evidence into the professional training process, providing greater safety, quality and comfort to the patients and professionals.

The process of care for the patient with urinary retention is part of the clinical everyday. In this sense, the validation for the Portuguese language of the EAAERU scale was proposed, to assess the confidence on this subject, according to the new spelling rules. In the study population, the EAAERU showed good psychometric properties, which indicates its use for teaching activities and for professional training throughout life, as well as for research.

References

1. Peng CW, Chen JJ, Cheng CL, Grill WM. Improved bladder emptying in urinary retention by electrical stimulation of pudendal afferents. J Neural Eng. 2008;5(2):144–154. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

2. Fernandes MCBC, Costa VV, Saraiva RA. Postoperative urinary retention: evaluation of patients using opioids analgesic. Rev. Latino-Am. Enfermagem. 2007;15(2):318–322. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

3. Mazzo A, Gaspar AACS, Mendes IAC, Trevizan MA, Godoy S, Martins JCA. Urinary catheter: Myths and rituals present in preparation of patients. Acta Paul Enferm. 2012;25(6):889–894. [Google Scholar]

4. Mazzo A, Godoy S, Alves LM, Mendes IAC, Trevizan MA, Rangel EML. Urinary catheterization: facilities and difficulties related to its standardization. Texto Contexto Enferm. 2011;20(2):333–339. [Google Scholar]

5. Bickley LS, Szilagyi PG. Bates' Guide to Physical Examination and History Taking. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2012. [Google Scholar]

6. Palese A, Buchini S, Deroma L, Barbone F. The effectiveness of the ultrasound bladder scanner in reducing urinary tract infections: a meta- analysis. J Clin Nurs. 2010;19(21-22):2970–2979. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

7. Gould CV, Umscheid CA, Agarwal RK, Kuntz G, Pegues DA; Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Guideline for prevention of catheter-associated urinary tract infections 2009. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010;31(4):319–326. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

8. Balderi T, Mistraletti G, D'Angelo E, Carli F. Incidence of postoperative urinary retention (POUR) after joint arthroplasty and management using ultrasound-guided bladder catheterization. Minerva Anestesiol. 2011;77(11):1050–1057. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

9. Ministério da Saúde (BR). Conselho Federal de Enfermagem . Resolução COFEN n.450, de 11 de dezembro de 2013. Normatiza o procedimento de Sondagem Vesical no âmbito do Sistema Cofen / Conselhos Regionais de Enfermagem.

What is the nursing intervention for urinary retention?

What is the most effective nursing measure to relieve urinary retention?

What are some nursing interventions that could help your patient regain urinary bladder function?

What are the 5 nursing interventions?