Welcome
Support Centre
22 May 2012 
ISRCTN Register - International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number
Trial registration
Unique identification scheme
International databases
home  |   my details  |   ISRCTN Register  |   mRCT  |   links  |   information  |   press
Find trials
ISRCTN Register
tips on searching

Registration
New application
Updating record

Information
introduction
governing board
ISRCTN FAQs
data set
letter of agreement
request information
guidance notes

[ Print-friendly version ]
Is looped nasogastric tube feeding more effective than conventional nasogastric tube feeding in dysphagia after acute stroke?
ISRCTN ISRCTN61174381
ClinicalTrials.gov identifier
Public title Is looped nasogastric tube feeding more effective than conventional nasogastric tube feeding in dysphagia after acute stroke?
Scientific title
Acronym N/A
Serial number at source 9.0
Study hypothesis Does use of the looped nasogastric tube (LNGT) in dysphagic acute stroke patients result in a greater proportion of nutritional prescription received per patient over a two-week period than conventional nasogastric tube use?
Lay summary
Ethics approval Ethics approval received from the Nottingham Research Ethics Committee 2 on the 22nd August 2006 (ref: 06/Q2404/60).
Study design Randomised controlled trial
Countries of recruitment United Kingdom
Disease/condition/study domain Stroke
Participants - inclusion criteria Any adult (>18 years of age) with an acute clinically diagnosed stroke as defined by World Health Organisation (WHO) standards; managed on the stroke unit. A clinical decision to attempt nasogastric tube feeding according to usual protocols has been made by the attending clinical team.
Participants - exclusion criteria 1. Those not consenting to either nasogastric tube (NGT) placement or to entry into the trial
2. Those lacking capacity for whom NG feeding is determined not to be in their best interests
3. Pregnant women
4. Those with contraindications to NG feeding (nasal trauma/malignancies)
Anticipated start date 01/06/2006
Anticipated end date 01/05/2008
Status of trial Completed
Patient information material
Target number of participants 110
Interventions Please note that this trial has now closed and analysis is underway. The previous anticipated end date for this trial was 01/12/2008.

Interventions:
The intervention group will receive all usual care except that the looped nasogastric feeding tube will be used for feed delivery. Subjects will have the loop component of the LNGT sited as per manufacturer’s instructions. The loop will be sited by either the research fellow, stroke nurses or ward staff who will have been fully trained in placing the loop. A nasogastric tube (NGT) will be passed and once in place fixed using the loop, thus creating the looped nasogastric tube. Upon confirmation that the NGT is correctly located, feeding will be commenced on an incremental fashion as per local protocols, which will vary between the centres.
Primary outcome measure(s) Percentage of nutritional prescription received (amount delivered/amount intended as per dietician’s prescription, including all feed and fluids) delivered in the two weeks from allocation or at the point NG feeding is stopped earlier on clinical grounds.
Secondary outcome measure(s) 1. Number of times tube re-sited in two weeks; treatment failure/completed treatment as specified (where treatment failure means any occasion where attempts at nasogastric tube feeding is ceased before normal oral intake is established, and includes multiple failed attempts at passing a tube, use of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) (in first two weeks), death or deterioration such that feeding is considered unsafe or unwanted)
2. Mean volume of nasogastric feed delivered in the two weeks from allocation
3. Proportion of patients requiring early PEG insertions
4. The technical efficiency (that is whether the best outcome is being achieved within a given set of resources) of looped nasogastric feeding after stroke compared to ordinary nasogastric tubes will be assessed from an National Health Service (NHS) perspective to see if this new technology offers value for money. An intervention specific outcome will be used to estimate an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in the form of a cost per change in percentage nutritional prescription received.
5. Change in Demiquet index from baseline to two weeks (weight in kilograms)
6. Tolerability or acceptability of technique by questionnaires to patients, families and nursing staff
Sources of funding 1. Royal College of Physicians (UK)
2. Dunhill Medical Trust Fellowship (UK)
Trial website
Publications 1. 2007 protocol in http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17683555
2. 2010 results in http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20667840
Contact name Dr  Simon  Conroy
  Address Senior Lecturer/Geriatrician
Department of Medical Education
University of Leicester School of Medicine
Maurice Shock Medical Sciences Building
PO Box 138
  City/town Leicester
  Zip/Postcode LE1 9HN
  Country United Kingdom
  Tel +44 (0)116 252 5878
  Fax +44 (0)116 252 5847
  Email spc3@le.ac.uk
Sponsor University of Nottingham (UK)
  Address Research Support and Commercialisation Office
University of Nottingham
University Park
  City/town Nottingham
  Zip/Postcode NG7 2RD
  Country United Kingdom
Date applied 05/04/2006
Last edited 30/07/2010
Date ISRCTN assigned 13/04/2006
Submit your trial protocol
Submit to Trials journal
Follow us on Twitter
© 2012 ISRCTN unless otherwise stated.


BioMed Central