Evaluation of Pain in Urinary Collections in Pediatric Emergencies in Children Who Have Not Acquired Cleanliness
NCT ID: NCT03263845
Last Updated: 2017-08-28
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
100 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2016-07-05
2017-01-13
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
A Randomized Controlled Trial on Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Children With Vesico-Ureteral Reflux
NCT00382343
Position of Children During Urine Collection: Evaluation Study
NCT01862822
Oral Antibiotics Alone in Children Aged 4 Weeks to 2 Months With a Urinary Tract Infection
NCT05819229
Bladder Stimulation Technique for Clean Catch Urine Collection in Infants
NCT03174834
Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Children With a Previous Urinary Tract Infection
NCT00156546
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Pocket-collected urine is not reliable for bacteriological analysis in culture. For example, if the urine strip is positive, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends urine sampling by urine sampling (or other invasive methods) for culture.
The urine bag should be changed every 30 minutes to avoid the risk of contamination. The technique is wait-and-see, the installation of several pockets is often necessary before obtaining urine.
A study carried out in 2014 shows that in 39.4% of the cases the withdrawal of the urinary pouch was as much more painful than the urinary sounding, in the same patient. To our knowledge there is no other study dealing with the difference in pain engendered by these two methods.
Since the urinary catheterization is faster, bacteriologically justified and necessary if the pocket collection is positive, it seems legitimate to ask ourselves if we should not aim at a generalization of the urinary catheterization, as first intention, Having not acquired cleanliness, requiring a withdrawal of urine for suspicion of urinary infection.
Many centers continue to use urinary pocket collection mainly, as the survey technique seems too invasive and painful.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
CASE_ONLY
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
3 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Rennes University Hospital
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Amelie Rickewaert
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Rennes University Hospital
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Rennes University Hospital
Rennes, , France
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
35RC16_3036_SONDAPU
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.