ArticleProceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)2021
Unsuitability of sump tubes for delivery of enteral nutrition and medications to intensive care unit patients.
Article in Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
16 Fr Salem Sump™ tubes have special features to facilitate suction drainage of the stomach, including a second lumen for air venting. These tubes are also commonly used to deliver enteral nutrition and medications to intensive care unit (ICU) patients, but we found no previous research to justify this practice. Because of the unused air vent, these tubes have a large external diameter and a small bore infusion channel (no larger than that of a single lumen 12 Fr feeding tube). The causes of 16 Fr Salem Sump tube obstructions in 17 ICU patients included clogged medications (8 cases) and precipitation of feeding formula (7 cases), each of which would be promoted by a narrow bore. Because of multiple drainage holes at their distal end, these tubes cannot be thoroughly cleansed by standard water flushing; moreover, their drainage holes mandate a deeper length of tube insertion beyond the gastroesophageal junction, which increases the likelihood of intestinal or pulmonary perforation. For these reasons, we conclude that 16 Fr Salem Sump tubes are inferior to standard feeding tubes for delivery of enteral nutrition and medications to patients in medical ICUs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.