PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 29, 2026Health Science Reports0 citationsOpen Access

Practical pH Testing for Nasogastric Tube Verification: A Prospective Method‐Comparison Study of Low‐Cost Handheld Meters and Colourimetric Strips

View Full Paper
LZLuca Danilo Zambetti

Key Points

  • This study aims to compare the effectiveness of handheld pH meters and colorimetric strips for verifying nasogastric tube placement through pH testing.
  • Conducted as a prospective method-comparison study
  • Involved adult inpatients receiving NG tube insertion
  • Measured gastric aspirate pH using both pH strips and handheld pH meters
  • Analyzed agreement with Bland-Altman and Cohen's kappa methods
  • Handheld pH meter had a mean bias of +0.17 pH units
  • Substantial categorical agreement with pH strips at pH ≤ 5.5 (κ = 0.754; p < 0.001)
  • Diagnostic accuracy via chest X-ray: sensitivity 80%, specificity 100%
  • Both pH methods showed similar performance for gastric placement confirmation

Abstract

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; p 5.5 do not reliably exclude gastric placement, and chest radiography remains necessary when results are inconclusive or discordant with clinical expectations.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Luca Danilo Zambetti (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69c8c384de0f0f753b39e5dbhttps://doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.72215
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Accuracy of pH strip testing and pH liquid testing versus standard pH meter of gastric contents in critically ill patients: a diagnostic accuracy study2024 · 1 citations
  2. 2A prospective observational study of pH testing to confirm ongoing nasogastric tube position2024 · 3 citations
  3. 3Use of pH Testing to Confirm Feeding Tube Placement: A Quality Improvement Project2026
  4. 4Checking nasogastric tube safety in children cared for in the community: a re-examination of the evidence base2024 · 2 citations
  5. 5Using capnography to differentiate airway from gastrointestinal placement of nasogastric tubes: a prospective multicentre diagnostic accuracy study2026