JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Endotracheal tube-assisted orogastric tube insertion in intubated patients in an ED.
American Journal of Emergency Medicine 2015 Februrary
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Inserting a nasogastric tube (NGT) in intubated patients may be difficult because they cannot follow swallowing instructions, resulting in a high rate of first-attempt failure. We introduce a simple technique for inserting an orogastric tube in an emergency department (ED).
METHODS: Fifty-six patients in the ED, who were intubated and required NGT insertion, were randomly allocated to 2 groups. We inserted the NGT using a conventional technique from the nostril (control group) and an endotracheal tube (ET)-assisted technique from the mouth (ET group). The procedures' success rate, insertion duration, and complications were compared between the groups.
RESULTS: There was a significantly higher overall success rate in the ET group than the control group (100% vs 64%, P<.001). Endotracheal tube group showed 100% first-attempt success rate, but 50% of the control group failed at first attempt. Mean duration of the first trial was not significantly different between the ET and control groups (58.0±16.9 vs 57.3±29.5 seconds, P=.903), but total time for successful insertion was longer in the control group than the ET group (58.0±16.9 vs 111.7±74.5 seconds, P<.001). There was less NGT kinking and more mucosal bleeding in the ET group than in the control group (0% vs 16%, P=.019; 16% vs 7%, P=.225, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Endotracheal tube-assisted orogastric tube insertion technique showed a higher rate of successful insertion and shorter total duration. With this result, ET-assisted orogastric tube insertion would be useful in ED.
METHODS: Fifty-six patients in the ED, who were intubated and required NGT insertion, were randomly allocated to 2 groups. We inserted the NGT using a conventional technique from the nostril (control group) and an endotracheal tube (ET)-assisted technique from the mouth (ET group). The procedures' success rate, insertion duration, and complications were compared between the groups.
RESULTS: There was a significantly higher overall success rate in the ET group than the control group (100% vs 64%, P<.001). Endotracheal tube group showed 100% first-attempt success rate, but 50% of the control group failed at first attempt. Mean duration of the first trial was not significantly different between the ET and control groups (58.0±16.9 vs 57.3±29.5 seconds, P=.903), but total time for successful insertion was longer in the control group than the ET group (58.0±16.9 vs 111.7±74.5 seconds, P<.001). There was less NGT kinking and more mucosal bleeding in the ET group than in the control group (0% vs 16%, P=.019; 16% vs 7%, P=.225, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Endotracheal tube-assisted orogastric tube insertion technique showed a higher rate of successful insertion and shorter total duration. With this result, ET-assisted orogastric tube insertion would be useful in ED.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app