IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v19y2010i11-12p1553-1559.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effectiveness of the auscultatory and pH methods in predicting feeding tube placement

Author

Listed:
  • Ayşe San Turgay
  • Leyla Khorshid

Abstract

Aims and objectives. This study was designed to determine the effectiveness of the auscultatory and pH methods in predicting feeding tube location in critically ill patients. Background. There is confusion about how nurses should asses feeding tubes location at the bedside. The most common method for determining tube location is the auscultatory method. It is known that auscultation is an unreliable method and additional data relating to bedside methods are needed to assist nurses in making a decision regarding tube location. Design. A methodological study. Methods. The sample consisted of 44 new insertions of feeding tubes. Data from a total of 44 auscultations relating to tube position and gastrointestinal aspirates for pH were obtained from 32 critically ill adult patients ranging in age from 38–87 years. Results from the auscultatory and pH tests were compared with the location of the tube as determined by radiography. A total of 44 feeding tube applications were investigated using the auscultatory and pH methods and concurrently with X‐rays to determine the feeding tube position. Nurses used the auscultatory method to predict tube position, a concurrent researcher aspirated fluid from the feeding tube, and samples were tested for pH within five minutes of radiographs taken to determine tube location. pH was measured with a test strip. Results. Mean pH level in the gastrointestinal aspirates was 4·23 (SD 1·20). Approximately 89% of the pH strip readings from gastrointestinal fluid were between 0–5. A pH of

Suggested Citation

  • Ayşe San Turgay & Leyla Khorshid, 2010. "Effectiveness of the auscultatory and pH methods in predicting feeding tube placement," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(11‐12), pages 1553-1559, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:19:y:2010:i:11-12:p:1553-1559
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03191.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03191.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03191.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mahmoud Al Kalaldeh, 2010. "Commentary on Turgay ST and Khorshid L (2010) Effectiveness of the auscultatory and pH methods in predicting feeding tube placement. Journal of Clinical Nursing 19, 1553–1559," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(17‐18), pages 2666-2667, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:19:y:2010:i:11-12:p:1553-1559. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.