Comparison the Success in Inserting a Feeding Tube from Nostril to Stomach between Classical Technique and Modified Samanta’s Technique in Patients Undergoing General Anesthesia for Abdominal Surgery

Abstract

Abstract: This randomized controlled trial aimed to compare the success in inserting a feeding tube from nostril to stomach between the use of Modified Samanta’s technique (intervention group) and the use of classical technique (control group) in patients with abdominal surgery undergoing general anesthesia. 62 patients selected during December 2020 to December 2021, were randomly allocated by computer, with allocation concealment, to one or other of the two groups. Patients and researcher were blinded to the technique used. A form for recording feeding tube insertion success was assessed using content validity devices. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics, namely chi-square, independent t-test, repeated measure ANOVA, logistic regression, survival analysis, log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model. The result showed no significant difference in the success of insertion between the two groups (p-value = .35). However, the time to completion of the procedure in the intervention group was shorter than that in the control group (difference of means = 18.10s; 95% CI: 4.31, 31.89) at p=.001. There was no difference between groups in bleeding (p=0.15, tube kinking (p=.21), or vital sign change (p>.05). In conclusion, the Modified Samanta’s technique is recommended as a method that is quicker and more efficient for extracting air from the stomach, facilitating faster gas removal. In future studies, several factors should be considered, including sample size and the technique of inserting the nasogastric tube to minimize the risk of bleeding and tube kinking.