Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 18, 2026
08:26
The Rigid Tube as an Alternative in Controlling the Problematic Airway
Published on: June 6, 2020
7.0K
Nasal bridles for securing nasoenteric tubes: a meta-analysis
Matthew L Bechtold1, Douglas L Nguyen, Lena B Palmer
1Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Missouri Health Sciences Center, CE405, DC 043.00, Five Hospital Dr, Columbia, MO 65212, USA.
Summary
Nasal bridles significantly reduce nasoenteric tube dislodgement compared to adhesive tape. However, they are associated with increased skin complications, while sinusitis rates remain similar.
Area of Science:
- Medical Devices
- Gastroenterology
- Patient Safety
Background:
- Nasoenteric feeding tubes are prone to dislodgement.
- Nasal bridles offer a potentially more secure method for tube fixation.
- Traditional methods rely on adhesive tape, which may be less effective.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the effectiveness of nasal bridles versus adhesive tape for securing nasoenteric feeding tubes.
- To evaluate the incidence of tube dislodgement, skin complications, and sinusitis.
Main Methods:
- A meta-analysis of six studies involving 594 adult patients was conducted.
- Data on tube dislodgement, skin complications, and sinusitis were pooled.
- Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1.
Main Results:
- Nasal bridles significantly reduced tube dislodgement compared to adhesive tape (OR, 0.16; P < .01).
- Nasal bridles were associated with a higher rate of skin complications (OR, 4.27; P < .01).
- No significant difference in sinusitis incidence was observed between groups (P = .22).
Conclusions:
- Nasal bridles are more effective than tape alone in preventing nasoenteric tube dislodgement.
- Clinicians should consider the increased risk of skin complications when using nasal bridles.
- Further research may be warranted to optimize nasal bridle use and minimize adverse effects.
