ArticleHealth science reports2026
Practical pH Testing for Nasogastric Tube Verification: A Prospective Method-Comparison Study of Low-Cost Handheld Meters and Colourimetric Strips.
Article in Health science reports, 2026. 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.
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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Nasogastric (NG) tubes are widely used for enteral nutrition, medication administration, and gastric decompression, but misplacement can cause serious, preventable harm. International guidelines recommend gastric aspirate pH testing with pH strips to reduce reliance on X-rays, but subjective color interpretation and stock shortages limit their reliability in resource-constrained settings. Commercial handheld pH meters offer objective digital readings and reusability, but their performance in routine clinical practice is uncertain. Methods: A prospective method-comparison study was conducted among adult inpatients requiring NG tube insertion in a South African public hospital. Gastric aspirate pH was measured using pH strips, followed immediately by a commercially available handheld pH meter on the same sample. Agreement was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis and Cohen's kappa, and diagnostic accuracy at a threshold of pH ≤ 5.5 was secondarily explored using routinely obtained chest radiography, where available, as the reference standard. Results: Forty-five patients were enrolled; gastric aspirate was obtained from 40 (89%), and 26 (58%) had both an aspirate and an interpretable chest X-ray. The handheld pH meter showed a mean bias of +0.17 pH units, with 95% limits of agreement from -0.46 to +0.80. At pH ≤ 5.5, categorical agreement with pH strips was substantial (κ = 0.754; Conclusions: In this cohort, a low-cost handheld pH meter showed a small mean bias and substantial categorical agreement with pH strips at pH ≤ 5.5. Its objective digital readout and reusability address key limitations of color-based strips and support its use in resource-constrained settings as a practical bedside tool for confirming gastric NG tube placement. However, pH values > 5.5 do not reliably exclude gastric placement, and chest radiography remains necessary when results are inconclusive or discordant with clinical expectations.
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.