ArticleJournal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences2013
Endoscopic gastrostomy, nasojejunal and oral feeding comparison in aspiration pneumonia patients.
Article in Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of prehabilitative gastrostomy tube feeding to bridge severely malnourished surgically unfit achalasia patients to per-oral endoscopic myotomy.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAspiration pneumonia is a potentially preventable illness requiring attention to small details of patient care. The type, management, and care of feeding should be carried out properly. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis is a prospective clinical study of enteral feeding on patients admitted to hospital with aspiration pneumonia. The known enteral nutritional methods, advantages, and disadvantages were told to the patient or proxy. If they didn't accept Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG), nasojejunal tube (NJT) was advised. If they denied all of the procedures, oral feeding education was given. A total of 94 patients were enrolled to the study, 29 of them accepted PEG, 42 preferred NJT, and 23 preferred oral route.
resultsA total of 94 patients with a mean age of 77.84, standard deviation 10.784; 95% confidence interval (CI) 75.63-80.03 were enrolled to the study of which 27 (28.7%) patients had a history of aspiration pneumonia. Oral feeding was prominently preferred for patients nursed by a relative (15; 65.2% of Oral feeding group and 16% of total) or a caregiver (7; 30.4% of Oral feeding group and 7.4% of total) while only 1 (4.3% of Oral feeding group and 1.1% of total) with a health-care worker (P = 0.001). Overall re-aspiration rates at the 6(th) month were 58%, 78%, 91% in EG, NJT, oral groups, respectively. Sixth months' survival rates of the different feeding groups were not significantly divergent from each other. History of aspiration was also found to be a significant contributor of mortality.
conclusionIn aspiration pneumonia patients' long-term survival rates of the different feeding groups were not significantly divergent from each other.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24523803PMC3908533W2143681785What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.