Investigating the Risk of Urinary Cancers for Patients with Long-term Foley Placement by Using National Health Insurance Research Database

• Main Authors: Yu-Han Wang, 王鈺涵
• Other Authors: Ming-Kuang Kuo
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2019
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/k73sxj

碩士 === 義守大學 === 醫務管理學系 === 107 === Background and Goals：Foley care is currently a common treatment for both hospitals and home care. Despite many researchers suspecting that using foley may relate to the onset of bladder cancer, little evidence however can affirm this relationship. The aim of this study is to investigate the hazard ratio of onset of urinary cancer between patients with and without long-term foley placement. Materials and Methods：The design of this research is retrospective with secondary data analysis. The data used for this study is extracted from National Health Insurance Database between 1997 and 2013. Eligibility criteria for study subjects were that a patient must (1) be diagnosed through an international classification of diseases, ninth revision, clinical modification (ICD-9-CM) starting with 185, 187, 188, 189.3, or 189.4 and (2) aged over 20. Patients with urinary-related cancer and long-term foley placement were matched by propensity score matching approach as control group subjects at a 1:2, 1:3, and 1:4 ratio, respectively. Results and Conclusions：The results show that the hazard ratio of the onset of bladder cancer for patients with more than two years of foley placement is 8.714, 9.771, and 10.929 times higher than those patients without foley placement for matching ration of 1:2, 1:3, and 1:4, respectively. Further, the hazard ratio of the onset of urinary cancer for patients with more than one year of foley placement is 9.569, 11.074, and 12.985 times higher than those patients without foley placement for matching ration of 1:2, 1:3, and 1:4, respectively. All hazard ratios are significant at a 0.05 level. One year or two years of foley placement can be used as a criterion for filtering study subjects. Further, propensity score matching of 1:2, 1:3, and 1:4 ratio show similar results.