Evaluation of a New Catheter Material for Intermittent Catheterization

This study has been completed.
Sponsor:
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
Wellspect HealthCare
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT01295281
First received: January 21, 2011
Last updated: January 15, 2014
Last verified: January 2014

January 21, 2011
January 15, 2014
March 2011
May 2011   (final data collection date for primary outcome measure)
Number of Participants With Discomfort [ Time Frame: At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
The primary objective of this study is to compare the subject's tolerability, with regards to perceived discomfort, when using two different urinary catheters. Perception of discomfort (yes/ no) will be assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. The frequency of discomfort will be compared between the treatments.
Not Provided
Complete list of historical versions of study NCT01295281 on ClinicalTrials.gov Archive Site
  • Perception of Pain [ Time Frame: At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
    To compare subject's tolerability with regards to perceived pain, when using two different urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.
  • Perception of Burning Sensation [ Time Frame: At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
    To compare subject's tolerability with regards to perceived burning sensation, when using two different urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.
  • Presence of Bleeding [ Time Frame: At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
    To compare subject's tolerability with regards to presence of bleeding, when using two different urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.
  • Perception of "Other Discomfort" [ Time Frame: At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
    To compare subject's tolerability with regards to perceived "other discomfort", when using two different urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Frequency of "other discomfort" (yes/ no) will be assessed in patient questionnaire. The frequency of "other discomfort" will be compared between the treatments. "Other discomfort" will be further specified using 5-graded scale (as for the other variables on the 5-graded scale the difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject).
  • Perception of Stiffness/ Rigidity [ Time Frame: At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    To evaluate subject perception related to the physical properties of the catheter, when practising intermittent self catheterization with urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.
  • Perception of Catheter Eyes [ Time Frame: At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    To evaluate subject perception related to the physical properties of the catheter, when practising intermittent self catheterization with urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.
  • Perception of Catheter Adherence [ Time Frame: At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    To evaluate subject perception related to the physical properties of the catheter, when practising intermittent self catheterization with urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.
  • Perception of Catheter Tip [ Time Frame: At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    To evaluate subject perception related to the physical properties of the catheter, when practising intermittent self catheterization with urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.
  • Perception of Slipperiness [ Time Frame: At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    To evaluate subject perception related to the properties of the catheter's coating/surface, when practising intermittent self catheterization with urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.
  • Perception of Smoothness [ Time Frame: At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    To evaluate subject perception related to the properties of the catheter's coating/surface, when practising intermittent self catheterization with urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.
  • Perception of Resistance [ Time Frame: At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    To evaluate subject perception related to the properties of the catheter's coating/surface, when practising intermittent self catheterization with urinary catheters; PVC vs. POBE 2.0. Assessed in patient questionnaire for each subject. A 5-graded scale will be used to determine the perception and the severity of each variable. The difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject.
  • Perception of Discomfort Due to Other Causes [ Time Frame: At 7 and 14 days after randomization, respectively ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
    To compare subject's tolerability with regards to perceived discomfort due to other causes, when using two different urinary catheters 2.0. Frequency of discomfort due to other causes (yes/ no) will be assessed in patient questionnaire. The frequency of discomfort due to other causes will be compared between the treatments. Discomfort due to other causes will be further specified using 5-graded scale (as for the other variables on the 5-graded scale the difference between the treatments will be calculated for each subject).
Not Provided
Not Provided
Not Provided
 
Evaluation of a New Catheter Material for Intermittent Catheterization
A Prospective, Randomized, Cross-over Study - Evaluation of a New Catheter Material for Intermittent Catheterization

The hypothesis to be investigated is if the tolerability of intermittent catheterization with Polyolefin Based Elastomer (POBE) 2.0 and Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) is clinically equal - i.e. clinically non-inferior when using POBE 2.0 compared to PVC.

Secondary objectives are to evaluate the safety and the subject's perception associated with the use of the catheters, assessed by the recording of adverse events and the ease of handling by means of a subjective assessment scale.

Not Provided
Interventional
Not Provided
Allocation: Randomized
Endpoint Classification: Safety/Efficacy Study
Intervention Model: Crossover Assignment
Masking: Open Label
Primary Purpose: Treatment
Catheterization (Clean, Intermittent Urinary Catheterization)
  • Device: LoFric POBE 2.0
    To be used at least twice daily, during 7 days. Treatment period 1 and 2 last 7 days, respectively.
  • Device: LoFric PVC
    To be used at least twice daily, during 7 days. Treatment period 1 and 2 last 7 days, respectively.
  • Experimental: LoFric POBE 2.0 - PVC
    First period (7 days) use of LoFric POBE 2.0 followed by second period (7 days) use of LoFric PVC
    Interventions:
    • Device: LoFric POBE 2.0
    • Device: LoFric PVC
  • Experimental: LoFric PVC - POBE 2.0
    First period (7 days) use of LoFric PVC followed by second period (7 days) use of LoFric POBE 2.0.
    Interventions:
    • Device: LoFric POBE 2.0
    • Device: LoFric PVC
Not Provided

*   Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline.
 
Completed
107
Not Provided
May 2011   (final data collection date for primary outcome measure)

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Provision of informed consent
  • Males, aged 18 years and over
  • Maintained urethra sensibility
  • Practice intermittent self-catheterization at least 2 times daily
  • Using catheters in the length of 40 cm and size charrière (Ch) 12 or Ch 14
  • Experienced practitioners of intermittent self-catheterization defined as a minimum of three months on therapy
  • Experience of using LoFric catheter within the last 12 months prior to study entry
  • Adults able to read, write and understand information given to them regarding the study

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Ongoing, symptomatic urinary tract infection (UTI) at enrolment as judged by investigator
  • Known urethral stricture at enrolment as judged by investigator
  • Involvement in the planning and/or conduct of the study (applies to both Astra Tech staff or staff at the study site)
  • Previous enrolment or randomisation of treatment in the present study
Male
18 Years and older
No
Contact information is only displayed when the study is recruiting subjects
Sweden
 
NCT01295281
LOF-0018
No
Wellspect HealthCare
Wellspect HealthCare
Not Provided
Principal Investigator: Birgit Johansson, Urotherapist Kärnsjukhuset Skövde
Wellspect HealthCare
January 2014

ICMJE     Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP