This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

F. Craig Fisher, MD
Lockport, NY

JAMA. 1989;262(18):2538.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

In the article entitled "A Clinical Trial of a Behavioral Therapy to Reduce Urinary Incontinence in Nursing Homes,"¹ many of us would consider the three patients who dropped out because they underwent catheterization by their family physicians as the experimental group and the rest as control subjects.

Were the patients who underwent catheterization in fact easier to care for, less dependent, more satisfactory aesthetically for the staff and less arduous to manage, and, with a diminished dependency on the staff, happier patients? Or were they made sicker and did they die sooner and in a less pleasant manner than those who were left to be incontinent? Is denial of catheterization for incontinent patients in nursing homes a shibboleth? Or does it represent "best medicine?"

I believe more attention should be paid to the benefits and demerits of this simple solution to incontinence, before dismissing it as . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?