Suprapubic catheter insertion is an outpatient procedure: cost savings resultant on closing an audit loop.

OBJECTIVE: To explore, by an audit, the regional practice of inserting a suprapubic catheter (SPC), and to prospectively determine the proportion of patients that can be successfully managed on an outpatient basis in one department.

METHODS: Both local and regional practice were determined by a retrospective analysis of the hospital database for all cases of SPC insertion between April 2005 and March 2006. In addition, a questionnaire was e-mailed to each of 11 urology departments. Locally, from August 2006 onwards, all patients scheduled for SPC insertion were referred to a new clinic, where the SPC was inserted using a new SPC kit and the Seldinger technique.

RESULTS: Locally, 66 patients (mean age 70 years, range 26-93) had a SPC inserted between April 2005 and March 2006; 49 had an elective procedure while 17 were emergency admissions. The median (range) hospital stay was 3.5 (1-85) days. Within the region, 480 SPCs were inserted in theatre during the same period, of which 52% (249) were inserted as elective inpatients, 11% (52) were inserted as a day case, and 37% (179) had SPCs as emergency admissions. A nurse-led outpatient service was available in two hospitals, where 89% of patients seen in the clinic had successful insertion under local anaesthesia, and only 11% were referred for insertion under general anasthesia. Between August 2006 and July 2007, 50 of 54 patients had a SPC inserted successfully in the new SPC clinic. There were no major complications. The cost benefits of adopting an outpatient management strategy were significant, at approximately GB 100,000 pounds/year in our hospital, 790,000 pounds/year in the region and 9,500,000 pounds/year for the UK.

CONCLUSION: An outpatient procedure for a SPC is safe and feasible in most patients, and its widespread use would produce considerable cost savings.