Objective To investigate the impact: of a urological community nursing
service on the mode of practice, efficiency, and quality of care in a
urological practice. Methods A urological community nurse was appoint
ed to investigate the possibility of performing various urological pro
cedures in the community rather than in hospital, with a prospective a
udit of the results for a period of 1 year. The setting was a busy uro
logical unit serving a mixed urban and rural catchment: area of 300 00
0 people. The outcome was assessed by the number and type of procedure
s successfully transferred from hospital to community practice. Result
s In 1 year, 464 urological episodes were performed in the patients' h
omes which otherwise would have required transfer or admission to hosp
ital for treatment or, in some cases, a cancelled operation. These epi
sodes included tuition in clean intermittent self-catheterization and
dilatation, changes and insertions of urethral, suprapubic and nephros
tomy catheters, bladder instillations to treat cancer and interstitial
cystitis, voiding trials with no catheter, urosheath fittings, and pr
e-operative visits and follow-up visits to avoid attendance at the cli
nic. Conclusions The urological community nursing service transferred
a significant number of routine urological procedures from hospital to
community with considerable financial savings and improvement in the
quality and efficiency of urological care.