The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Randomized Crossover Study of Silver-Coated Urinary Catheters in Hospitalized Patients
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Urinary tract infections (UTIs) account for 30% to 40% of nosocomial infections resulting in morbidity, mortality, and increased length of hospital stay. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of a silver-alloy, hydrogel-coated latex urinary catheter for the prevention of nosocomial catheter-associated UTIs. METHODS: A 12-month randomized crossover trial compared rates of nosocomial catheter-associated UTI in patients with silver-coated and uncoated catheters. A cost analysis was conducted. RESULTS: There were 343 infections among 27,878 patients (1.23 infections per 100 patients) during 114,368 patient-days (3.00 infections per 1000 patient-days). The relative risk of infection per 1000 patient-days was 0.79 (95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.99; P =.04) for study wards randomized to silver-coated catheters compared with those randomized to uncoated catheters. Infections occurred in 291 of 11,032 catheters used on study units (2.64 infections per 100 catheters). The relative risk of infection per 100 silver-coated catheters used on study wards compared with uncoated catheters was 0.68 (95% confidence interval, 0.54-0.86; P =.001). Fourteen catheter-associated UTIs (4.1%) were complicated by secondary bloodstream infection. One death appeared related to the secondary infection. Estimated hospital cost savings with the use of the silver-coated catheters ranged from $14,456 to $573,293. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of infection declined by 21% among study wards randomized to silver-coated catheters and by 32% among patients in whom silver-coated catheters were used on the wards. Use of the more expensive silver-coated catheter appeared to offer cost savings by preventing excess hospital costs from nosocomial UTI associated with catheter use. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:3294-3298.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Hooton, T. M., Bradley, S. F., Cardenas, D. D., Colgan, R., Geerlings, S. E., Rice, J. C., Saint, S., Schaeffer, A. J., Tambayh, P. A., Tenke, P., et al. (2010) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/650482 · Cited by 2,099
Gosheger, G., Hardes, J., Ahrens, H., Streitburger, A., Buerger, H., Erren, M., Gunsel, A., Kemper, F. H., Winkelmann, W., & von Eiff, C. (2004) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.01.008 · Cited by 441
Prevention of catheter-associated urinary tract infection
Trautner, B. W., Hull, R. A., & Darouiche, R. O. (2005) · Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1097/00001432-200502000-00007 · Cited by 99
Metadata
- Authors
- Karchmer, T. B., Giannetta, E. T., Muto, C. A., Strain, B. A., & Farr, B. M.
- Venue
- Archives of Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2000-11-27
- Volume
- 160
- Issue
- 21
- Pages
- 3294
- ISSN
- 0003-9926 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2155498213
- Cited by
- 267
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Randomized Crossover Study of Silver-Coated Urinary Catheters in Hospitalized Patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archinte.160.21.3294
- The paper
- Karchmer, T. B., Giannetta, E. T., Muto, C. A., Strain, B. A., & Farr, B. M. (2000). A Randomized Crossover Study of Silver-Coated Urinary Catheters in Hospitalized Patients. Archives of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.160.21.3294
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.