Nasogastric tube versus gastrostomy tube for gastric decompression in abdominal surgery: a prospective, randomized trial comparing patients' tube-related inconvenience

Abstract

This prospective randomized trial supports the clinical observation that NT causes more subjective inconvenience than GT. In cases when a prolonged postoperative ileus is expected, decisions for a prophylactic decompressing tube system have to weigh up the possibilities of different averse clinical as well as subjective outcomes. It is then preferable to include patients' preferences in the individual decision making process (shared-decision making).

Checking for interviewer bias in outcome assessment: a method for strengthening the design of prospective, randomised trials in surgery

“…In summary, the findings of this interview-rating study increased our confidence in the results of the randomised clinical trial showing higher degrees of patient-reported inconvenience and discomfort with the nasogastric tube than with the gastrostomy tube [17]. It seems unlikely that the results of this randomised trial were confounded with an interviewer bias.…”

“…In the present study two external raters listened to tape recordings of interviews that were taken in the context of a randomised, controlled, clinical trial that compared two types of gastric decompression [17]. These interviews were conducted by two study physicians in order to assess therapy-induced discomfort.…”

“…The randomised clinical trial: interviewing patients A randomised clinical trial was performed, comparing two methods of gastric decompression: nasogastric tube versus gastrostomy tube [17]. The primary endpoint was the patients' subjective tube-related pain and inconvenience.…”

“…This is to make sure that the experimental procedure is being held constant within conditions and that any outcome assessment procedures (e.g., interviewing) are being held constant across conditions. In the present report we describe a checking procedure for potential interviewer bias in the context of a prospective, randomised trial that compared two procedures for gastric decompression (nasogastric tube versus gastrostomy tube), in which the primary endpoint was the patients' subjective complaints (quality of life) as assessed through a standardised interview [17].…”

Placement of feeding tubes using fluoroscopy guidance and over-the-wire technique: A technical review

“…5,7 Although placement of transnasal feeding tubes is less invasive and inexpensive compared to other modalities, it has been related to poor quality-of-life measures including subjective discomfort, poor cosmesis, and influence on social activities. 6,8 Long-term feeding tube placement has also been related to the development of mucositis and paranasal sinusitis. 9 In the clinical practice guideline published by Itkin et al, 3 transnasal feeding tubes are suited for patients who require short-term enteral feeding for less than 6 weeks.…”