Evidence Hub

Effect of a full-process intelligent information management system on the prevention of postoperative infection in patients with indwelling double-J stents after surgery for urinary tract stones: a randomized controlled trial

Huang Z, Lin L, Chen L, Huang H

Frontiers in surgery, 2026

100 participants

Abstract

Objective To prospectively compare conventional postoperative management with full-process intelligent information management in patients with indwelling double-J ureteral stents after surgery for urinary tract stones, focusing on delayed stent removal, catheter-related urinary tract infection, discharge teaching quality, social support, and patient satisfaction. Methods This was a single-center prospective randomized controlled trial. A total of 100 patients with postoperative indwelling double-J stents after surgery for urinary tract stones who underwent day surgery in the Department of Urology of our hospital between April 2023 and December 2024 were enrolled and randomly assigned, using a random number table, to a control group (n = 50) or an intervention group (n = 50). The control group received conventional management, whereas the intervention group received full-process intelligent information management in addition to conventional care. The primary outcomes were delayed double-J stent removal and catheter-related urinary tract infection. Secondary outcomes included the Quality of Discharge Teaching Scale (QDTS), the Social Support Rating Scale (SSRS), and patient satisfaction. Results Compared with the control group, the intervention group had a significantly lower rate of delayed double-J stent removal (0.00% vs. 10.00%, P = 0.048) and catheter-related urinary tract infection (0.00% vs. 12.00%, P = 0.023). The intervention group also had a significantly higher QDTS…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 100 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free