3811 Improving patient dignity and mobility through appropriate urinary catheter bag selection: a multi-site QIP

Abstract Introduction Indwelling urinary catheters are commonly used in hospitalised adults. Measuring bags, while necessary for fluid monitoring in specific cases, are often used by default without clear indication. This can restrict mobility, affect dignity, and contribute to functional decline in patients with preserved mobility. This project aimed to evaluate the usage of urine collection systems and their impact on patient well-being and improve the usage of less restrictive leg bags where appropriate. Methods QIP was conducted on medical wards at two hospital sites. Cycle 1 (Jan–Feb 2024) included a prospective audit of n = 116 with short-term indwelling catheters. Patients requiring long-term catheters or strict fluid balance monitoring were excluded. Data were collected from clinical records and interviews with staff and patients, assessing catheter bag type, clinical justification, and its impact on dignity and mobility. Baseline mobility was assessed using the Bedside Mobility Assessment Tool (BMAT). A flowchart was then introduced to support appropriate bag selection based on clinical need, mobility, and patient preference. Cycle 2 (n = 120) was completed in July 2025. Results In Cycle 1, 84% of patients had measuring bags, but 59% were deemed to be suitable for leg bags. BMAT scores indicated 49% of patients were non-ambulatory. Of the mobile patients, 19% reported dignity concerns, and 13% felt mobility was affected. After the intervention, measuring bag use decreased to 58%, and leg bag use rose to 42%. Patient-reported dignity concerns reduced from 19% to 7%, and mobility restriction from 13% to 12%. Conclusions This project identified a care gap where default use of measuring bags often overlooked clinical need, dignity and mobility. Implementation of a flowchart and education delivered to nursing and medical staff improved awareness and encouraged patient-centred urine collection bag selection. Embedding this in local training and inductions could support wider adoption across similar settings.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Age and Ageing
Published
2026-02-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afaf368.074
Primary Topic
Patient Dignity and Privacy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

3811 Improving patient dignity and mobility through appropriate urinary catheter bag selection: a multi-site QIP

U Ashraf, R Singh, N Karjigi, R Malkawi et al.
Age and Ageing
Patient Dignity and Privacy
article

3811 Improving patient dignity and mobility through appropriate urinary catheter bag selection: a multi-site QIP

U Ashraf, R Singh, N Karjigi, R Malkawi, S Kaur, M Hamza
article en

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Indwelling urinary catheters are commonly used in hospitalised adults. Measuring bags, while necessary for fluid monitoring in specific cases, are often used by default without clear indication. This can restrict mobility, affect dignity, and contribute to functional decline in patients with preserved mobility. This project aimed to evaluate the usage of urine collection systems and their impact on patient well-being and improve the usage of less restrictive leg bags where appropriate. Methods QIP was conducted on medical wards at two hospital sites. Cycle 1 (Jan–Feb 2024) included a prospective audit of n = 116 with short-term indwelling catheters. Patients requiring long-term catheters or strict fluid balance monitoring were excluded. Data were collected from clinical records and interviews with staff and patients, assessing catheter bag type, clinical justification, and its impact on dignity and mobility. Baseline mobility was assessed using the Bedside Mobility Assessment Tool (BMAT). A flowchart was then introduced to support appropriate bag selection based on clinical need, mobility, and patient preference. Cycle 2 (n = 120) was completed in July 2025. Results In Cycle 1, 84% of patients had measuring bags, but 59% were deemed to be suitable for leg bags. BMAT scores indicated 49% of patients were non-ambulatory. Of the mobile patients, 19% reported dignity concerns, and 13% felt mobility was affected. After the intervention, measuring bag use decreased to 58%, and leg bag use rose to 42%. Patient-reported dignity concerns reduced from 19% to 7%, and mobility restriction from 13% to 12%. Conclusions This project identified a care gap where default use of measuring bags often overlooked clinical need, dignity and mobility. Implementation of a flowchart and education delivered to nursing and medical staff improved awareness and encouraged patient-centred urine collection bag selection. Embedding this in local training and inductions could support wider adoption across similar settings.

Age and AgeingVol. 55(Supplement_1)
University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 66%
Patient Dignity and Privacy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.