Evidence Hub

Oro-esophageal feeding for tracheostomized patients with severe traumatic brain injury: a randomized controlled trial

Dandan Lv, Hongyan Liu, Jing Zhao, Yang Liu, Qian-Qian Li, Xing’na Zhao, Liu-Gen Wang, Xi Zeng et al.

Annals medicus, 2026

104 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Abstract Background This study reports the clinical effects of intermittent oro-esophageal tube feeding (IOE) versus nasogastric tube feeding (NGT) on nutritional status, aspiration pneumonia, decannulation, and level of consciousness in tracheostomized patients with severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI). Methods A randomized controlled trial was conducted between March 2024 and October 2025 in China and included tracheostomized patients with sTBI. Participants were randomized 1:1 to the intervention and control groups for 28-day interventions. IOE or NGT was used for nutritional supports, respectively. The primary outcome was nutritional status, including hemoglobin, albumin, prealbumin and body mass index. The secondary outcomes included aspiration pneumonia, decannulation, and level of consciousness assessed using the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS). Generalized linear mixed-effects models, generalized estimating equations, and Cox regression were used for data analyze. Results A total of 104 participants were included in the analysis. After intervention, significant interaction effects were observed in hemoglobin (β = 5.272, 95% CI: 2.707, 7.837), albumin (β = 3.675, 95% CI: 1.854, 5.496), prealbumin (β = 11.835, 95% CI: 6.623, 17.047), body mass index (β = 1.719, 95% CI: 0.868, 2.569), the GCS (β = 0.981, 95% CI: 0.572, 1.390), and aspiration pneumonia (OR= 0.304, 95% CI: 0.133, 0.693). The Cox model revealed that group significantly influenced the decannulation outcomes [HR…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 104 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free