ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Performance of Point-of-Care Ultrasonography in Confirming Feeding Tube Placement in Mechanically Ventilated Patients.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bedside Ultrasonography-Guided Nasogastric Tube Placement: Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The Utilization of Point of Care Ultrasound (POCUS) for the Confirmation of Gastric and Post-Pyloric Feeding Tube Placement in a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit.POCUS journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA feeding tube (FT) is routinely placed in critically ill patients, and its correct placement is confirmed with a chest X-ray (CXR), which is considered the gold standard. This study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography (USG) in verifying FT placement compared to a CXR in an intensive care unit (ICU).
methodThis was a prospective single-blind study conducted on patients admitted to the ICU of a tertiary hospital in Malaysia. The FT placements were verified through a fogging test and USG at the neck and subxiphoid points. The results of confirmation of FT placement through USG were compared with those obtained using CXRs.
resultsA total of 80 patients were included in this study. The FT positions were accurately confirmed by overall USG assessments in 71 patients. The percentage of FT placements correctly identified by neck USG was 97.5%, while the percentage of those identified by epigastric USG was 75%. The corresponding patients' CXRs confirmed correct FT placement in 76 patients. The overall USG assessment had a sensitivity of 92.11% and specificity of 75%, a positive predictive value of 98.59%, and a negative predictive value of 33.33%. The USG findings also showed a significant association between FT size and BMI. FTs with a size of 14Fr were better visualized (
conclusionUSG is a simple, safe, and reliable bedside assessment that offers relatively high sensitivity in confirming correct FT placement in critically ill patients.
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.