Risk factors for infusion-related phlebitis with small peripheral venous catheters. A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for infusion-related phlebitis with peripheral intravenous catheters. DESIGN: A randomized trial of two catheter materials, with consideration of 21 potential risk factors. SETTING: A university hospital. PATIENTS: Hospitalized adults without granulocytopenia who received a peripheral intravenous catheter. INTERVENTIONS: House officers or ward nurses inserted the catheters, and each insertion was randomized to a catheter made of tetrafluoroethylene-hexafluoropropylene (FEP-Teflon) or a novel polyetherurethane without leachable additives (PEU-Vialon). MEASUREMENTS: Research nurses scored insertion sites each day for inflammation and cultured catheters at removal. RESULTS: The Kaplan-Meier risk for phlebitis exceeded 50% by day 4 after catheterization. intravenous antibiotics (relative risk, 2.00), female sex (relative risk, 1.88), prolonged (greater than 48 hours) catheterization (relative risk, 1.79), and catheter material (PEU-Vialon: FEP-Teflon) (relative risk, 0.73) strongly predicted phlebitis in a Cox proportional hazards model (each, P less than 0.003). The best-fit model for severe phlebitis identified the same predictors plus catheter-related infection (relative risk, 6.19), phlebitis with a previous catheter (relative risk, 1.54), and anatomic site (hand: forearm, relative risk, 0.71; wrist:forearm, relative risk, 0.60). The low incidence of local catheter-related infection was comparable with the two catheter materials (5.4% [95% CI, 3.8% to 7.6%] and 6.9% [CI, 4.9% to 9.6%]); none of the 1054 catheters prospectively studied caused bacteremia. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple factors, including the infusate and the duration of cannulation, contribute to the development of infusion-related phlebitis. The use of peripheral intravenous catheters made of PEU-Vialon appears to pose the same risk for catheter-related infection as the use of catheters made of FEP-Teflon, and PEU-Vialon can permit longer cannulation with less risk for phlebitis. The risk for catheter-related bacteremia with FEP-Teflon and PEU-Vialon catheters is sufficiently low that it no longer seems justifiable to recommend the use of small steel needles for most peripheral intravenous therapy.     

Central vs peripheral venous catheters in critically ill patients

A prospective study of 2,209 intravenous catheters was performed in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit to determine when and why catheters were removed and which sites of insertion were associated with the least morbidity. Techniques of insertion were vigorously supervised. Central and peripheral catheters were cared for by identical protocols. Overt phlebitis or inflammation around the site was 14 times as common with peripheral catheters (353/1,024) than with centrally inserted central catheters (18/713), even though peripheral catheters were removed on the average at 2.9 days and centrally inserted central catheters at 6.2 days. Pneumothorax occurred in seven out of 713 patients with centrally inserted central catheterization, one with hemothorax and two with pneumothoraces requiring thoracostomy tubes. Five were treated successfully with simple catheter aspiration. Three patients out of 1,496 with peripheral or peripherally inserted central catheters required phlebectomy for suppurative thrombophlebitis. We concluded that overall morbidity in critically ill patients is lower from centrally inserted central catheters than peripheral intravenous catheters, with peripherally inserted central catheters in an intermediate position. Supervision of techniques of insertion has to be kept at a high level to keep complications of central catheterization at an acceptable level. Peripheral catheter sites would be better maintained with more frequent replacement of the catheter.     

Research utilization: Adhesive bandage dressing regimen for peripheral venous catheters

Background: This project used the process of research utilization to apply research knowledge to clinical practice for dressing peripheral intravenous (IV) catheters.Method: The project included (1) the review and synthesis of multiple research studies, (2) transformation of the research-based knowledge into a clinical protocol of use of adhesive bandage (AB) for dressing peripheral IV catheters, and (3) evaluation of the proportion of phlebitis as an outcome measure for comparison of peripheral IV catheter sites dressed with 2 × 2 inch gauze/tape or AB. Integral to the research utilization process was the use of planned change strategies.Results: The proportion of phlebitis among peripheral IV catheters dressed with gauze/tape was 16.7% compared with 14.9% for AB. Antimicrobial ointment applied to the insertion site resulted in a higher proportion of phlebitis when used with an AB.Conclusion: This project used a research utilization framework to transfer research knowledge into clinical practice. To assure dissemination and implementation of the new practice, the use of ABs for dressing peripheral IVs was incorporated into hospital policy and procedure. In addition, the discontinuation of application of an antimicrobial ointment to peripheral IV sites was reinforced.     

New peripherally inserted midline catheter: a better alternative for intravenous antibiotic therapy in patients with cystic fibrosis.

A study was performed on outpatients with cystic fibrosis (CF) to evaluate the performance of an over-the-needle peripherally inserted midline catheter for the delivery of 2-week courses of antibiotic therapy. The midline is a 7-inch catheter inserted in the antecubital region with the tip located in the axillary region. It is made of a newly developed biomaterial that softens and expands upon contact with body fluids. The hypotheses for the study were that the midline catheter: 1) is useful for intermediate-length therapies; 2) can prevent multiple 3-day conventional peripheral catheter restarts; 3) can prevent or delay the use of more invasive central devices; 4) is comfortable for patients; and 5) is economical. A total of 41 midlines were inserted in 27 patients with an average age and weight of 22 years and 109 pounds, respectively. Prior to this study implanted ports and primarily conventional short peripheral catheters were used to administer I.V. therapy to these patients; fifty percent of these short peripheral catheters failed within 2.6 days. At 2 weeks of dwell, 80% of the midline catheters placed in these patients were still indwelling. Also, 80% of all midline catheter removals were for non-catheter-related reasons. There were no cases of midline catheter phlebitis. In contrast, the phlebitis rates published for peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and conventional short peripheral catheters at 7 days of dwell are 20% and greater than 51% respectively. The midline catheters were comfortable and well liked by most patients and became more economical than conventional peripheral catheters for therapies lasting approximately 6 days through 1 to 2 months.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Phlebitis Rate and Time Kinetics of Short Peripheral Intravenous Catheters

Abstract.Background: An observational prospective cohort study was carried out on complication rates and time kinetics of phlebitis caused by short peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) in inpatients on 15 hospital wards in four hospitals in Cologne, Germany.Patients and Methods: We observed 1,582 patients with 2,495 PIVCs daily using standardized questionnaires. Phlebitis was defined using modified Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria.Results: Average phlebitis rates were 27 per 100 patients and 104 per 1,000 catheter days. Median duration of PIVC was 2 days (25 percentile = 2 days; 75 percentile 3 days). Time kinetics (Kaplan-Meier) were linear.Conclusion: Linear time kinetics of PIVC phlebitis do not support CDC recommendations for an elective PIVC change after 72 hours, provided daily monitoring of the insertion site occurs.     

Large volume ultrafiltration for acute decompensated heart failure using standard peripheral intravenous catheters

BackgroundUltrafiltration for decompensated heart failure has recently generated significant clinical interest with the development of a portable machine that does not require an intensive care or dialysis unit. This case series was designed to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of performing large volume ultrafiltration via peripherally inserted standard intravenous (IV) catheters in patients with acute decompensated heart failure.Methods and ResultsNine hospitalized patients with decompensated heart failure underwent peripheral ultrafiltration (PUF) therapy with peripheral IV catheters. The mean length of time of PUF therapy was 33.3 ± 20.0 hours with a mean volume removed of 7.0 ± 4.9 L. All patients experienced a statistically significant mean weight loss of 6.2 ± 5.0 kg, P = .01. There was no statistically significant change in renal function.ConclusionWe report the first successful implementation of ultrafiltration via standard peripheral IV catheters to remove a large volume of fluid over an extended period of time reliably in a small group of patients. The ability to use PUF therapy via peripheral IV catheters will potentially allow this therapy to be implemented more easily in a variety of care settings to treat patients with resistant heart failure.     

Long peripheral catheters for deep arm vein venous access: A systematic review of complications

PurposeLong peripheral catheters (LPCs) offer a quick, simple and cost-effective alternative for venous access in intensive care patients with difficult venous access, but the decision to use them must be balanced against an assessment of harm. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise reports of complications associated with LPCs.MethodsThe electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched systematically for randomised controlled trials, cohort studies and case control studies published in the period 1966 to 24th July 2018 reporting LPC associated occlusion, catheter related blood stream infections, phlebitis and infiltration. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies. The studies were described and participant characteristics; type of catheter; setting; average dwell time; and rates of occlusion, catheter related blood stream infection, phlebitis and infiltration were extracted as summary measures.ResultsFive cohort studies and one randomised controlled study, comprising a total of 350 participants, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Dwell time ranged from 1 to 15days and the reported complication rate was 3–14%. The most common complication was catheter occlusion (4%), followed by phlebitis (1%), infiltration (0.9%), and catheter related blood stream infection (0.3%). Significant heterogeneity, particularly in identification and reporting of complications, means results should be interpreted with caution.ConclusionThere is a lack of intervention specific and adequately powered randomised controlled trials investigating LPCs in an intensive care setting. Until the results of such studies are available, LPCs should be used as an alternative to ultrasound-guided PVCs in well monitored acute care environments.     

Bacterial colonization and phlebitis-associated risk with transparent polyurethane film for peripheral intravenous site dressings

Previous studies of various brands of polyurethane dressings have noted differences in the rates of catheter colonization. We compared Bioclusive transparent polyurethane (TP) dressing with a cotton gauze (CG) dressing on peripheral intravenous (IV) access sites for the incidence of phlebitis, catheter tip colonization, skin colonization, and catheter-related bacteremia. The study, involving 598 ward patients, was case controlled, prospective, and randomized for a period of 4 months. Each patient was entered into the study only once, and all dressings were applied by a member of the IV therapy team. No significant difference was seen for phlebitis rate (TP: 9.8% vs. CG: 7.6%) or catheter tip colonization, defined as greater than 15 colony forming units (CFU) (5.7% vs. 4.4%) by a semiquantitative technique. Cultures of specimens from the skin and catheter tips of the majority of patients (91%) showed no growth. An association was found between those patients with greater than 15 CFU isolated from catheter tips and those with phlebitis (p = 0.022). No documented catheter-related bacteremia occurred in either study group.     

Intravenous therapy team and peripheral venous catheter-associated complications. A prospective controlled study

A prospective controlled trial was conducted on four similar inpatient medical wards to test the hypothesis that a trained intravenous therapy (IVT) team would substantially reduce the incidence of peripheral intravenous (IV) catheter-related complications. We followed 863 IV catheters. The overall incidence of phlebitis in the ward staff-maintained IV catheters was 32% as compared with 15% for those maintained by the IVT team. The incidence of two more serious complications (cellulitis and suppurative phlebitis) was reduced tenfold from 2.1% to 0.2%. We conclude that an IVT team can substantially reduce the iatrogenic complications related to IV catheters.     

An evaluation of peripherally inserted central venous catheters for children with cancer requiring long-term venous access

Long-term venous access is essential when treating malignant diseases. We reviewed our experience with peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) in children suffering from various malignancies with regard to catheter life, reasons for removal, and complications. Ninety-three PICCs were inserted in 78 children. Median catheter life was 162 days (range 6–575 days) with a total of 16,266 catheter days. Seventy-five PICCs (80.6%) had been placed until the elective removal or patients’ death, whereas 18 PICCs (19.4%) were removed due to PICC-related complications; a rate of 1.11 per 1,000 catheter days. Complications requiring removal of PICCs included infection (n = 12), occlusion (n = 3), dislodgement (n = 2), and phlebitis (n = 1) with rates of 0.74, 0.18, 0.12 and 0.06 per 1,000 catheter days, respectively. We conclude that PICC provides reliable long-term intravenous access in children suffering from malignancies.     

The epidemiology of peripheral vein infusion thrombophlebitis: a critical review

We critically assessed studies on the clinical importance, diagnosis, incidence, and pathogenesis of peripheral vein infusion thrombophlebitis, including catheter-related and patient-related risk factors. We reviewed the evidence linking thrombosis, particularly prothrombotic states such as the inherited thrombophilic disorders, with peripheral vein infusion thrombophlebitis. Peripheral vein infusion thrombophlebitis occurs in 25% to 35% of hospitalized patients with peripheral intravenous catheters and has both patient-related implications (e.g., sepsis) and economic consequences (e.g., extra nursing time). Although duration of catheterization, catheter-related infection, and catheter material are important risk factors for peripheral vein infusion thrombophlebitis, patient-related risk factors are not well elucidated.     

Are physicians aware of which of their patients have indwelling urinary catheters?

PURPOSE: Although infections associated with indwelling urinary catheters are common, costly, and morbid, the use of these catheters is unnecessary in more than one-third of patients. We sought to assess whether attending physicians, medical residents, and medical students are aware if their hospitalized patients have an indwelling urinary catheter, and whether physician awareness is associated with appropriate use of these catheters. METHODS: The physicians and medical students responsible for patients admitted to the medical services at four university-affiliated hospitals were given a list of the patients on their service. For each patient, the provider was asked: "As of yesterday afternoon, did this patient have an indwelling urethral catheter?" Respondents' answers were compared with the results of examining the patient. RESULTS: Among 288 physicians and students on 56 medical teams, 256 (89%) completed the survey. Of 469 patients, 117 (25%) had an indwelling catheter. There were a total of 319 provider-patient observations among these 117 patients. Overall, providers were unaware of catheterization for 88 (28%) of the 319 provider-patient observations. Unawareness rates by level of training were 21% for students, 22% for interns, 27% for residents, and 38% for attending physicians (P = 0.06). Catheter use was inappropriate in 36 (31%) of the 117 patients with a catheter. Providers were unaware of catheter use for 44 (41%) of the 108 provider-patient observations of patients who were inappropriately catheterized. Catheterization was more likely to be appropriate if respondents were aware of the catheter (odds ratio = 3.7; 95% confidence interval, 2.1 to 6.7, P <0.001). CONCLUSION: Physicians are commonly unaware that their patients have an indwelling urinary catheter. Inappropriate catheters are more often "forgotten" than appropriate ones. System-wide interventions aimed at discontinuing unnecessary catheterization seem warranted.     

Gauze vs. plastic for peripheral intravenous dressings

The authors conducted a randomized, prospective, controlled trial of three different dressings for peripheral intravenous catheters in 301 acutely ill medical inpatients. Catheters were dressed with dry clean gauze or one of two brands of transparent plastic. The gauze dressings remained in place significantly longer (47 hours median) than either Uniflex (39 hours) of Tegaderm (32 hours) transparent plastic dressings (p = 0.026). Catheters were removed for complications (inflammation, mechanical failure, or infiltration) in 35% of the gauze group, compared with 58% of the Uniflex group and 48% of the Tegaderm group (p = 0.015). Not only were inflamed venipuncture sites seen less often with gauze, inflammation occurred later (p = 0.002) and with lesser severity. Dry gauze dressings resulted in longer catheter life, lower complication rates, and less expense than transparent plastic dressings for peripheral intravenous catheters.     

Antibiotic-coated hemodialysis catheters for the prevention of vascular catheter-related infections: a prospective, randomized study

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of minocycline-rifampin-coated hemodialysis catheters in reducing catheter-related infections in patients requiring hemodialysis for acute renal failure. METHODS: Between May 2000 and March 2002, 66 patients were randomly assigned to receive a minocycline-rifampin-impregnated central venous catheter and 64 were randomly assigned to receive an unimpregnated catheter. Patients were followed prospectively until the catheter was removed. Catheter-related infection was determined through quantitative catheter cultures, quantitative blood cultures, or both. RESULTS: Both groups of patients were similar in age, sex, underlying disease, type of dialysis (continuous vs. intermittent), neutropenia during catheterization and its duration, catheter insertion difficulties, and administration of blood products or medication. The mean (+/- SD) catheter dwell time was the same in both groups (8 +/- 6 days, P = 0.7). There were seven catheter-related infections (11%), all associated with the use of unimpregnated catheters. Kaplan-Meier estimates for the risk of catheter-related infection showed that coated catheters were less likely to be associated with infection (P = 0.006). CONCLUSION: The use of polyurethane hemodialysis catheters impregnated with minocycline and rifampin decreases the risk of catheter-related infection in patients with acute renal failure.     

经下腔静脉放置冠状静脉窦电极导管对操作者放射剂量影响的研究

目的 经下腔静脉(IVC)放置冠状静脉窦(CS)电极导管理论上存在减少操作者放射剂量的可能性.本文在对比经IVC可调弯电极导管与经上腔静脉(SVC)固定弯电极导管置入CS操作的可行性和操作者所受的放射剂量.方法 202例患者,经下腔静脉组(IVC组)122例、经上腔静脉组(SVC组)80例,两组患者年龄、性别、超声心动图和心律失常类型方面差异均无统计学意义.IVC组采用可控弯10极电极导管,SVC组使用固定弯10极电极导管,由同一组术者操作.记录两组患者导管放置时曝光时间,并测定操作者所受放射剂量.结果 IVC组122例患者中有2例电极导管不能到位,改经SVC途径仍未成功;SVC组80例全部放置成功.两组平均每例曝光时间相似[(105±12)s vs(108±19)s;P=0.925].单位时间所受放射剂量平均值在IVC组为0.25×10-2uGy/s,SVC组为1.38×10-2uGy/s.IVC组和SVC组操作者平均每例接受放射剂量分别为(0.30±0.04)uGy和(1.49±0.27)uGy(P＜0.001).两组皆未发现心脏和血管并发症.结论 与固定弯电极导管经SVC途径比较,可控弯电极导管经IVC途径置入CS电极导管的单位时间放射量明显降低,在不增加操作时间的同时可显著减少操作者所受放射剂量.     

Adherent microorganisms on lumenal surfaces of long-term intravenous catheters. Importance of Staphylococcus epidermidis in patients with cancer

Using electron microscopy, we prospectively evaluated how frequently adherent microorganisms colonized silicone rubber intravenous (Hickman) catheters removed from patients with cancer. Thirteen (87%) of 15 catheters had gram-positive cocci in glycocalyx adherent to the surface of the catheter lumen. Fungal elements or gram-negative bacilli were mixed with the gram-positive cocci in the glycocalyx on the lumens of three catheters. A consistent morphologic form was adherent to, and the same species was recovered from, the corresponding catheter for six of 27 organisms causing septicemia during catheterization: four of five Staphylococcus epidermidis bacteremias and the only Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia, and one of five candidemias. Three of these six septicemias were successfully treated without removal of the catheter. Although adherent organisms, particularly S epidermidis, were likely to be present on the surface of the lumen of long-term, indwelling, silicone intravenous catheters, septicemias potentially related to these organisms occurred infrequently (fewer than two per 1000 days of catheter use), and the suspect septicemias could sometimes be treated without removal of the catheter.     

Infusion phlebitis in patients with acute pneumonia: a prospective study.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To prospectively assess the relative risk for phlebitis in a series of consecutive patients with pneumonia and to identify risk factors that predict an increased risk for phlebitis. SETTING: Internal medicine department of a tertiary teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Seven hundred sixty-six consecutive patients with acute pneumonia receiving IV therapy. INTERVENTIONS: Only the first catheter was taken into account. There were 308 short lines (a 51-mm, 18-gauge Teflon catheter); 307 midsized lines (a 28-cm, 16-gauge polyvinyl chloride catheter); and 151 long lines (71-cm, 14-gauge plain polyurethane catheter). Eighteen variables were prospectively evaluated in an open, nonrandomized study for their contribution to the occurrence of phlebitis. RESULTS: The overall phlebitis rate was 39%. Phlebitis developed in 53% of patients with short lines, in 41% of patients with midsized lines, and in 10% of patients with long lines, and these catheters remained in place an average (+/- SD) of 3.0+/-2.4 days, 4.6+/-3.4 days, and 7.8+/-6.6 days, respectively. The variables that influenced the development of phlebitis, as determined by multivariate analysis, were the following: type of catheter; blood hemoglobin levels; and IV therapy with either corticosteroids or erythromycin. CONCLUSIONS: According to our data, when the use of a catheter is expected to be required for < or = 36 h, a short line can be used. If a longer duration is expected, a longer line is warranted. Ours is the first study in which the relationship between blood hemoglobin levels and phlebitis has been reported. Because the use of intravascular devices is increasingly common, a more complete knowledge of the factors that influence their acceptance has become essential.     

Single- versus triple-lumen central catheter-related sepsis: a prospective randomized study in a critically ill population.

PURPOSE: A prospective randomized study was conducted over a 23-month period in an adult medical-surgical intensive care unit to determine whether triple-lumen catheters reduce the need for peripheral vascular access and whether they are associated with a higher rate of infection than single-lumen catheters. PATIENTS AND METHODS: After the insertion route, internal jugular or subclavian, was selected by the physician, patients were randomized either to single-lumen or triple-lumen catheter groups. Complementary peripheral vascular access was allowed in both groups. Catheters were removed according to preestablished defined reasons: suspicion of catheter-related sepsis, uselessness of central venous access, duration of catheterization of more than 21 days, discharge from the intensive care unit, or death. RESULTS: Data on 129 central venous catheters were collected from 91 consecutive patients. Twenty-five of 68 patients from the single-lumen group and 1 of 61 patients from the triple-lumen group needed peripheral vascular access (p less than 0.001). Catheter-related sepsis rates, defined either by clinical signs and positive qualitative tip cultures (8.9% versus 11.5%) or by quantitative tip cultures (16.2% versus 11.5%), were identical in the single-lumen and triple-lumen groups (type II error: 8%). CONCLUSION: In intensive care units, the use of triple-lumen catheters is associated with a dramatic decrease in the need for peripheral vascular access. The incidence of central venous catheter-related sepsis appears identical for single- and triple-lumen catheters.     

Emergency room staff education and use of a urinary catheter indication sheet improves appropriate use of foley catheters

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate use of indwelling urinary tract catheters (IUTCs) in the hospital setting is widespread and associated with nosocomial urinary tract infections. In a prior observational study, we found less than half of IUTCs placed in hospitalized elderly patients had appropriate indications. We tested an emergency department (ED) intervention to increase appropriate use of IUTCs. METHODS: The intervention included ED staff education and an indication checklist attached to each catheter kit for staff to complete prior to use. We completed a chart audit on appropriate use of urinary catheters in 100 consecutive catheterized ED patients and tracked catheter billing data before and after the intervention. RESULTS: Appropriate use of catheters increased from 37% to 51% (P=0.06). The presence of a physician order for catheter placement significantly increased from 43% to 63% (P< 0.01). There was a large and sustained decrease in the total number of catheters placed in the ED after the intervention (N=2029 in 2001 and N=2188 in 2002 to N=300 in 2004 and N= 512 in 2005). CONCLUSIONS: Education and use of an indication sheet produced a dramatic reduction in total number of catheters used and had a smaller impact on appropriateness of use and documentation.     

Urinary catheters: what type do men and their nurses prefer?

OBJECTIVES: Urinary catheters are used frequently, but the relative risks and benefits of different types of devices are not clear. We sought to determine the beliefs of both older male patients and nursing staff about the relative merits and problems of condom and indwelling catheters. DESIGN: Patient and nurse survey using convenience sampling. SETTING: A University-affiliated Veterans Affairs medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Men hospitalized on medical, rehabilitation and nursing home units using either an indwelling or a condom catheter were invited to participate as were all members of the nursing staff on these units. Of 116 eligible patients, 104 were interviewed (response rate = 90%). Of 107 eligible nursing staff members, 99 completed the questionnaires (response rate = 92%). INTERVENTION AND MEASUREMENTS: Consenting patients were interviewed personally about their urinary catheter. The nursing staff were asked to complete a self-administered questionnaire. RESULTS: Patients were mostly older and predominantly hospitalized on the medical service. Compared with those using an indwelling catheter, patients using a condom catheter were more likely to believe that their catheter was comfortable (86 vs 58%, P = .04) and less likely to believe it was painful (14 vs 48%, P = .008) or to restrict their activity (24 vs 61%, P = .002). The nursing staff had a mean of 13 years nursing experience, and the majority worked in the nursing home unit. Most of the nursing staff respondents believed that condom catheters were less painful and restrictive for patients and were easier to apply, but they also believed that they fell off and leaked more often and required more nursing time. CONCLUSIONS: Both patients and nursing staff prefer condom to indwelling catheters for patient comfort, but they recognize that dislodgment and leaking are major drawbacks of condom catheters. A more secure condom catheter would greatly improve the management of male incontinence.