Biomedical subjects

A Vollebregt

Publications and source records attributed to A Vollebregt.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2004

How long should urinary bladder catheterisation be continued after vaginal prolapse surgery? A randomised controlled trial comparing short term versus long term catheterisation after vaginal prolapse surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether prolonged urinary bladder catheterisation after vaginal prolapse surgery is advantageous. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: A large training hospital in the Netherlands. POPULATION: Patients undergoing anterior colporrhaphy. METHODS: One hundred patients were included. Patients were randomised into two groups. In one group (n= 50), a transurethral catheter was in place for four days post-operatively and removed on the fifth post-operative day. In the other group (n= 50), catheterisation was not prolonged and the catheter was removed the morning after surgery. Residual volumes after removal of the catheter were measured by ultrasound scanning. Where residual volumes of >200 mL were found the patient was recatheterised for three more days. Urinary cultures were taken before removal of the catheter. Six patients were excluded: four in the standard prolonged catheterisation group and two in the not prolonged catheterisation group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Need for recatheterisation, urinary tract infection, mean duration of catheterisation and hospital stay. RESULTS: Residual volumes exceeding 200 mL and need for recatheterisation occurred in 9% in the standard prolonged catheterisation group versus 40% of patients in the not prolonged catheterisation group (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.045-0.47). Positive urine cultures were found in 40% of cases in the standard prolonged catheterisation group compared with 4% in the not prolonged catheterisation group (OR 15, 95% CI 3.2-68.6). Mean duration of catheterisation was 5.3 days in the standard prolonged catheterisation group and 2.3 days in the not prolonged catheterisation group (P < 0.001). Mean duration of hospitalisation was 7 days in the standard prolonged catheterisation group and 5.7 days in the not prolonged group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The disadvantages of prolonged catheterisation outweigh the advantages, therefore, removal of the catheter on the morning after surgery may be preferable and longer term catheterisation should only be undertaken where there are specific indications.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Prepidil compared to Propess for cervical ripening.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of intracervical PGE(2) gel (Prepidil) with intravaginal PGE(2) insert (Propess) in cervical ripening and induction of labour. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective analysis of patients with single pregnancies, intact membranes and a viable fetus who required cervical ripening. In the first half of 1998, all patients received Prepidil and in the first half of 1999 all patients received Propess. In both periods 50 consecutive files were retrieved and compared. RESULTS: The Prepidil and Propess group were similar in patient characteristics, indication for induction of labour and delivery outcome. Cervical ripening within 24 h was achieved in the Propess group in 80% as compared to 56% in the Prepidil group. The application-membrane rupture-interval was shorter in the Propess group compared to the Prepidil group (23.7 +/- 21.3 h versus 56.4 +/- 77.7 h, P = 0.009) as well as the application-delivery interval (29.8 +/- 22.0 h versus 62.0 +/- 78.8 h, P = 0.039). In the Propess group 62% delivered within 24 h compared to 28% in the Prepidil group. A smaller number of applications was observed in the Propess group (1.2 versus 1.8, P < 0.005). Both methods proved to be safe in cervical priming and no relevant differences in mode of delivery and outcome of labour were detected. None of the patients required an emergency caesarean section during the treatment with prostaglandines. CONCLUSIONS: Both prostaglandin E(2) agents are safe and effective in achieving cervical ripening; however the vaginal insert demonstrated a shorter application-delivery interval. The hospital stay was consequently shorter, contributing to cost effectiveness.

Administration, Intravaginal↗

PubMed1999

A study of PROforma, a development methodology for clinical procedures.

Knowledge engineering has shown that besides the general methodologies from software engineering it is useful to develop special purpose methodologies for knowledge based systems (KBS). PROforma is a newly developed methodology for a specific type of knowledge based systems. PROforma is intended for decision support systems and in particular for clinical procedures in the medical domain. This paper reports on an evaluation study of PROforma, and on the trade-off that is involved between general purpose and special purpose development methods in Knowledge Engineering and Medical AI. Our method for evaluating PROforma is based on re-engineering a realistic system in two methodologies: the new and special purpose KBS methodology PROforma and the widely accepted, and more general KBS methodology CommonKADS. The four most important results from our study are as follows. Firstly, PROforma has some strong points which are also strong related to requirements of medical reasoning. Secondly, PROforma has some weak points, but none of them are in any way related to the special purpose nature of PROforma. Thirdly, a more general method like CommonKADS works better in the analysis phase than the more special purpose method PROforma. Finally, to support a complementary use of the methodologies, we propose a mapping between their respective languages.

Artificial Intelligence↗