Literature DB >> 30665700

A review of guidelines to distinguish between gastric and pulmonary placement of nasogastric tubes.

Norma A Metheny1, Mary M Krieger2, Frances Healey3, Kathleen L Meert4.   

Abstract

The purpose of this review was to (1) identify areas of agreement and disagreement in guidelines/recommendations to distinguish between gastric and pulmonary placement of nasogastric tube and (2) summarize factors that affect choices made by clinicians regarding which method(s) to use in specific situations. Systematic searches were conducted in the PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL Plus databases using a combination of keywords and data-specific subject headings. Searches were limited to guidelines/recommendations from national level specialty groups and governmental sources published in the English language between January 1, 2015 and September 20, 2018. Fourteen guidelines that described methods to distinguish between gastric and pulmonary placement of nasogastric tubes were identified from a variety of geographic locations. Tube placement testing methods included in the review were: radiography, respiratory distress, aspirate appearance, aspirate pH, auscultation, carbon dioxide detection and enteral access devices. All fourteen guidelines agreed that radiography is the most accurate testing method. Of the nonradiographic methods, pH testing was most favored; least favored was auscultation.
Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  enteral nutrition; gastrointestinal; intubation; nasogastric tubes; practice guidelines; tube placement determination

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30665700     DOI: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2019.01.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart Lung        ISSN: 0147-9563            Impact factor:   2.210


  3 in total

1.  Development and validation of ester impregnated pH strips for locating nasogastric feeding tubes in the stomach-a multicentre prospective diagnostic performance study.

Authors:  Melody Ni; Mina E Adam; Fatima Akbar; Jeremy R Huddy; Simone Borsci; Peter Buckle; Francesca Rubulotta; Reuben Carr; Ian Fotheringham; Claire Wilson; Matthew Tsang; Susan Harding; Nichola White; George B Hanna
Journal:  Diagn Progn Res       Date:  2021-12-14

2.  Factors associated with mechanical device-related complications in tube fed patients: A multicenter prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Fernanda Raphael Escobar Gimenes; Flávia Fernanda Luchetti Rodrigues Baracioli; Adriane Pinto de Medeiros; Patricia Rezende do Prado; Janine Koepp; Marta Cristiane Alves Pereira; Camila Baungartner Travisani; Soraia Assad Nasbine Rabeh; Fabiana Bolela de Souza; Adriana Inocenti Miasso
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-11-19       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Accuracy of the combined method (auscultation and pH measurement) and ultrasonography for confirmation of gastric tube placement: a study protocol for a prospective study.

Authors:  Mayara Carvalho Godinho Rigobello; Jorge Elias Junior; Carlos Alberto Grespan Bonacim; Renata Cristina de Campos Pereira Silveira; Fernanda Caroline Bonardi; Roosevelt Santos Nunes; Rosana Aparecida Pereira; Fernanda Raphael Escobar Gimenes
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 2.692

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.