• 1.

    Smarick SD, Haskins SC & Aldrich J, et al. Incidence of catheter-associated urinary tract infection among dogs in a small animal intensive care unit. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2004;224:19361940.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Lippert A. Nosocomial infection surveillance in a small animal intensive care unit. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1988;24:627636.

  • 3.

    Barsanti JA, Blue J, Edmunds J. Urinary tract infection due to indwelling bladder catheters in dogs and cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1985;187:384388.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Norris CR, Williams BJ & Ling GV, et al. Recurrent and persistent urinary tract infections in dogs: 383 cases (1969–1995). J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2000;36:484492.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Ling GV, Norris CR & Franti CE, et al. Interrelations of organism prevalence, specimen collection method, and host age, sex, and breed among 8,354 canine urinary tract infections (1969–1995). J Vet Intern Med 2001;15:341347.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Stiffler KS, Stevenson MA & Sanchez S, et al. Prevalence and characterization of urinary tract infections in dogs with surgically treated type 1 thoracolumbar intervertebral disc extrusion. Vet Surg 2006;35:330336.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Sanchez S, McCrackin Stevenson MA & Hudson CR, et al. Characterization of multidrug-resistant Escherichia coli isolates associated with nosocomial infections in dogs. J Clin Microbiol 2002;40:35863595.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Gibson JS, Morton JM & Cobbold RN, et al. Multidrug-resistant E. coli and enterobacter extraintestinal infection in 37 dogs. J Vet Intern Med 2008;22:844850.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Mazzulli T. Resistance trends in urinary tract pathogens and impact on management. J Urol 2002;168:17201722.

  • 10.

    Godfrey H, Evans A. Management of long-term urethral catheters: minimizing complications. Br J Nurs 2000;9:7476,7881.

  • 11.

    Kunin CM, McCormack RC. Prevention of catheter-induced urinary-tract infections by sterile closed drainage. N Engl J Med 1966;274:11551161.

  • 12.

    Warren JW. Catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2001;17:299303.

  • 13.

    Barrett M, Campbell VL. Aerobic bacterial culture of used intravenous fluid bags intended for use as urine collection reservoirs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2008;44:24.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Forrester SD, Troy GC & Dalton MN, et al. Retrospective evaluation of urinary tract infection in 42 dogs with hyperadrenocorticism or diabetes mellitus or both. J Vet Intern Med 1999;13:557560.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Fung JC, Lucia B & Clark E, et al. Primary culture media for routine urine processing. J Clin Microbiol 1982;16:632636.

  • 16.

    Wise L. Nosocomial canine urinary tract infections in a veterinary teaching hospital (1983 to 1988). J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1990;26:148152.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Bubenik LJ, Hosgood GL & Waldron DR, et al. Frequency of urinary tract infection in catheterized dogs and comparison of bacterial culture and susceptibility testing results for catheterized and noncatheterized dogs with urinary tract infections. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2007;231:893899.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Ahearn DG, Grace DT & Jennings MJ, et al. Effects of hydrogel/silver coatings on in vitro adhesion to catheters of bacteria associated with urinary tract infections. Curr Microbiol 2000;41:120125.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Al-Habdan I, Sadat-Ali M & Corea J, et al. Assessment of nosocomial urinary tract infections in orthopaedic patients: a prospective and comparative study using two different catheters. Int Surg 2003;88:152154.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Horton JA III, Kirshblum SC & Linsenmeyer TA, et al. Does refrigeration of urine alter culture results in hospitalized patients with neurogenic bladders? J Spinal Cord Med 1998;21:342347.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Lewis JF, Alexander JJ. Overnight refrigeration of urine specimens for culture. South Med J 1980;73:351352.

  • 22.

    Padilla J, Osbourne C, Ward G. Effects of storage time and temperature on quantitative culture of canine urine. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1981;178:10771081.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement

Evaluation of open versus closed urine collection systems and development of nosocomial bacteriuria in dogs

Lauren A. SullivanJames L. Voss Veterinary Medical Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523.

Search for other papers by Lauren A. Sullivan in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 dvm
,
Vicki L. CampbellJames L. Voss Veterinary Medical Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523.

Search for other papers by Vicki L. Campbell in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 dvm, dacva, dacvecc
, and
Serene C. OnumaJames L. Voss Veterinary Medical Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523.

Search for other papers by Serene C. Onuma in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 ms

Abstract

Objective—To determine whether use of a closed urine collection system would decrease the incidence of nosocomial bacteriuria in hospitalized dogs, compared with use of an open urine collection system (used, sterile IV bags).

Design—Randomized controlled trial.

Animals—51 hospitalized dogs requiring indwelling urinary catheterization for ≥ 24 hours.

Procedures—Dogs were randomly assigned to an open or closed urine collection system group. A standardized protocol for catheter placement and maintenance was followed for all dogs. A baseline urine sample was collected via cystocentesis for aerobic bacterial culture, with additional urine samples obtained daily from the urine collection reservoir.

Results—27 dogs were assigned to the open urine collection system group, and 24 were assigned to the closed urine collection system group. The incidence of nosocomial bacteriuria in dogs with open urine collection systems (3/27 [11.1%]) was not significantly different from incidence in dogs with closed urine collection systems (2/24 [8.3%]). Median duration of catheterization was 2 days for dogs in both groups; the range was 1 to 7 days for dogs in the open group and 1 to 5 days for dogs in the closed group.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggested that for dogs requiring short-term indwelling urinary catheterization, the type of urine collection system (open vs closed) was not associated with likelihood of developing nosocomial bacteriuria. Use of a strict protocol for urinary catheter placement and maintenance was likely key in the low incidence of nosocomial bacteriuria in the present study.

Abstract

Objective—To determine whether use of a closed urine collection system would decrease the incidence of nosocomial bacteriuria in hospitalized dogs, compared with use of an open urine collection system (used, sterile IV bags).

Design—Randomized controlled trial.

Animals—51 hospitalized dogs requiring indwelling urinary catheterization for ≥ 24 hours.

Procedures—Dogs were randomly assigned to an open or closed urine collection system group. A standardized protocol for catheter placement and maintenance was followed for all dogs. A baseline urine sample was collected via cystocentesis for aerobic bacterial culture, with additional urine samples obtained daily from the urine collection reservoir.

Results—27 dogs were assigned to the open urine collection system group, and 24 were assigned to the closed urine collection system group. The incidence of nosocomial bacteriuria in dogs with open urine collection systems (3/27 [11.1%]) was not significantly different from incidence in dogs with closed urine collection systems (2/24 [8.3%]). Median duration of catheterization was 2 days for dogs in both groups; the range was 1 to 7 days for dogs in the open group and 1 to 5 days for dogs in the closed group.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggested that for dogs requiring short-term indwelling urinary catheterization, the type of urine collection system (open vs closed) was not associated with likelihood of developing nosocomial bacteriuria. Use of a strict protocol for urinary catheter placement and maintenance was likely key in the low incidence of nosocomial bacteriuria in the present study.

Contributor Notes

Supported in part by the Center for Companion Animal Studies PVM student grant program at Colorado State University.

The authors thank Steven Radecki for assistance with statistical analysis.

Address correspondence to Dr. Sullivan (lasulli@colostate.edu).