Skip to main content

Table 1 Overview of the evidence level for a comparison of HCIC and non-HCIC catheters for the different pathologies

From: A scoping review on the impact of hydrophilic versus non-hydrophilic intermittent catheters on UTI, QoL, satisfaction, preference, and other outcomes in neurogenic and non-neurogenic patients suffering from urinary retention

Population

Satisfaction

Preference

Adverse events

UTI

QoL

HEOR

Pain and discomfort

SCI

+ +/−

+

+ +/− −

+ + +/−

+ +

+ + +/− −

+

SB

+/− −

+ +/−

/− −

+/− −

+ +

NA

/−

MS

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

BPH

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Mixed

+ + +/−

+ + + 

+ + +/−

+ +  +/− −

+ + +

+ + +/− −

+ + +/−

All

+ + +/−

+ + + 

+ + +/− −

+ +  +/− −

+ + +

+ + +/− −

+ + +/− −

  1. BPH Benign prostate hypertrophy, HCIC Hydrophilic-coated intermittent catheters, HEOR Health economics and outcomes research, MS Multiple sclerosis, NA Not available, QoL Quality of life, SB Spina bifida, SCI Spinal cord injury, UTI Urinary tract infection
  2. + to + + +: The literature supports claims of hydrophilic catheters as being superior to uncoated catheters
  3. − to − − − No significant difference between hydrophilic and uncoated catheters or uncoated catheters are superior