Comparison of electromagnetic guided imagery to standard confirmatory methods for ascertaining nasogastric tube placement in children

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 NURSING
Beth Wathen MSN, RN, PNP, CCRN-K, Heidi L. McNeely MSN, RN, PCNS-BC, Christine Peyton MSN, CPNP-AC, Zhaoxing Pan PhD, Robin Thomas BSN, RN, CCRN, Cayla Callahan BSN, RN, CCRN, Sara Fidanza MSN, RN, CNS-BC, CPNP-PC, James Brown BSN, RN, CPN, Madalynn Neu PhD, RN, FAAN
{"title":"Comparison of electromagnetic guided imagery to standard confirmatory methods for ascertaining nasogastric tube placement in children","authors":"Beth Wathen MSN, RN, PNP, CCRN-K,&nbsp;Heidi L. McNeely MSN, RN, PCNS-BC,&nbsp;Christine Peyton MSN, CPNP-AC,&nbsp;Zhaoxing Pan PhD,&nbsp;Robin Thomas BSN, RN, CCRN,&nbsp;Cayla Callahan BSN, RN, CCRN,&nbsp;Sara Fidanza MSN, RN, CNS-BC, CPNP-PC,&nbsp;James Brown BSN, RN, CPN,&nbsp;Madalynn Neu PhD, RN, FAAN","doi":"10.1111/jspn.12338","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>Evaluate the accuracy of an electromagnetic device (EMD) guided nasogastric tube (NGT) placement compared with standard confirmation methods. A secondary aim was to determine if EMD guided NGT placement would avert potential pulmonary misplacements of the tube.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) patients were enrolled if they had an NGT order during the study period of April 2014 through December 2016. Patients were included if they were one through 18 years of age. An EMD trained nurse inserted the NGT using EMD guidance. An insertion questionnaire, confirming if the nurse determined the NGT to be gastric per EMD, was completed immediately after NGT placement and before confirmation via either pH testing or radiographic imaging.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Forty-five patients were enrolled in the study. Nurses reported, based on EMD, that 86.7% (<i>n</i> = 39) of placements were gastric. Overall agreement between EMD guided tube placement and pH testing was 58% (<i>n</i> = 26). The marginal distribution was significantly different between the two methods (<i>p</i> = .0029). When compared to radiographic confirmation, sensitivity of the pH method was 32% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 17%–51%) compared with 85% (95% CI 69%–95%) for the EMD method.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>EMD guidance was superior to pH testing when compared with radiographic confirmation of nasogastric tube placement in children.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Practice Implications</h3>\n \n <p>EMD guided NGT placement is a potentially viable method for confirming nasogastric tube placement in children when done by appropriately trained clinicians. More research on EMD guided NGT placement in children is needed before any practice recommendation can be made.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":54900,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Specialists in Pediatric Nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/jspn.12338","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for Specialists in Pediatric Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jspn.12338","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Purpose

Evaluate the accuracy of an electromagnetic device (EMD) guided nasogastric tube (NGT) placement compared with standard confirmation methods. A secondary aim was to determine if EMD guided NGT placement would avert potential pulmonary misplacements of the tube.

Design and Methods

Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) patients were enrolled if they had an NGT order during the study period of April 2014 through December 2016. Patients were included if they were one through 18 years of age. An EMD trained nurse inserted the NGT using EMD guidance. An insertion questionnaire, confirming if the nurse determined the NGT to be gastric per EMD, was completed immediately after NGT placement and before confirmation via either pH testing or radiographic imaging.

Results

Forty-five patients were enrolled in the study. Nurses reported, based on EMD, that 86.7% (n = 39) of placements were gastric. Overall agreement between EMD guided tube placement and pH testing was 58% (n = 26). The marginal distribution was significantly different between the two methods (p = .0029). When compared to radiographic confirmation, sensitivity of the pH method was 32% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 17%–51%) compared with 85% (95% CI 69%–95%) for the EMD method.

Conclusions

EMD guidance was superior to pH testing when compared with radiographic confirmation of nasogastric tube placement in children.

Practice Implications

EMD guided NGT placement is a potentially viable method for confirming nasogastric tube placement in children when done by appropriately trained clinicians. More research on EMD guided NGT placement in children is needed before any practice recommendation can be made.

电磁引导成像与标准确认方法确定儿童鼻胃管放置位置的比较
目的评价电磁装置(EMD)引导鼻胃管(NGT)置入与标准确认方法的准确性。第二个目的是确定EMD引导下的NGT放置是否会避免潜在的肺管错位。设计与方法在2014年4月至2016年12月的研究期间,儿科重症监护病房(PICU)的患者如果有NGT订单,则纳入研究。年龄在1岁到18岁之间的患者也包括在内。经过EMD培训的护士在EMD指导下插入NGT。在NGT放置后,在通过pH测试或放射成像确认之前,立即完成一份插入问卷,以确认护士是否确定NGT为胃。结果45例患者入组。护士报告,基于EMD, 86.7% (n = 39)的放置是胃。EMD引导置管和pH检测的总体一致性为58% (n = 26)。两种方法的边际分布差异有统计学意义(p = 0.0029)。与x线摄影证实相比,pH法的灵敏度为32%(95%置信区间[CI]: 17%-51%),而EMD法的灵敏度为85% (95% CI: 69%-95%)。结论在儿童鼻胃管置入术中,EMD指导优于pH试验。实践意义EMD引导下的NGT放置是一种潜在可行的方法,可以在经过适当培训的临床医生的指导下确定儿童鼻胃管的放置。在提出任何实践建议之前,需要对EMD引导下的儿童NGT安置进行更多的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
27
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Linking science and practice by publishing evidence-based information on pediatric nursing and answering the question, ''How might this information affect nursing practice?'' The Journal for Specialists in Pediatric Nursing (JSPN) is the international evidence-based practice journal for nurses who specialize in the care of children and families. JSPN bridges the gap between research and practice by publishing peer-reviewed reliable, clinically relevant, and readily applicable evidence. The journal integrates the best evidence with pediatric nurses'' passion for achieving the best outcomes. The journal values interdisciplinary perspectives and publishes a wide variety of peer-reviewed papers on clinically relevant topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信