Evidence Hub

Comparative Study of Effect of Intermittent Oral Enteral Nutrition Tube in Tracheostomized Patients With Intracerebral Hemorrhage

ClinicalTrials.gov · COMPLETED, 2023

118 participants

Abstract

This was a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled clinical trail involved tracheostomized patients with Intracerebral Hemorrhage.

The goal of this clinical trial is to compare the clinical effect of Intermittent Oro-esophageal Tube Feeding vs Nasogastric Tube Feeding in Tracheostomized Patients with Intracerebral Hemorrhage. The main questions it aims to answer are:

Compared to Nasogastric Tube Feeding, can the Intermittent Oro-esophageal Tube Feeding better improve the nutritional status, extubation of tracheostomy tube, pulmonary infection, neurological deficit of Patients with Intracerebral Hemorrhage Compared to Nasogastric Tube Feeding, is the Intermittent Oro-esophageal Tube Feeding safer.

Participants will be divided into two groups randomly, with different nutritional support respectively.

Conditions: Intracerebral Hemorrhage.

Primary outcome: Number of cases of successful extubation.

Enrollment: 118 participants.

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: 118 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