Nasally placed feeding tubes are heavily relied on in healthcare. Inadvertent tube removal not only poses safety hazards and discomfort for the patient, but also causes strain on valuable healthcare resources. Because use of restraints can agitate patients, increase safety hazards, and create a sense of depersonalization, alternative methods to prevent inadvertent tube removal are desirable. This article describes a feeding tube bridle constructed with supplies that are inexpensive and readily available to most patient care units. This method has been successfully utilized for patients at significant risk for self-initiated feeding tube removal in one Midwestern facility for many years without adverse effects. The method of bridling feeding tubes described here is effective, safe, and relatively comfortable as well as minimally noticeable to the patient and others. (Nutr Clin Pract. 2011;26:70-77)
Mion LC, Minnick AF, Leipzig RM, Catrambone CD, Johnson MEPatient-initiated device removal in intensive care units: a national prevalence study. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(12): 2714-2720.
2.
Richmond AL, Jarog DL, Hanson VMUnplanned extubation in adult critical care: quality improvement and education payoff. Crit Care Nurse. 2004;24(1):32-37.
3.
Popovich MJ, Lockrem JD, Zivot JBNasal bridle revisited: an improvement in the technique to prevent unintentional removal of small-bore nasoenteric feeding tubes. Crit Care Med. 1996;24(3): 429-431.
4.
Meer JAInadvertent dislodgement of nasoenteral feeding tubes: incidence and prevention . JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 1987; 11(2):187-189.
5.
Happ MBPreventing treatment interference: the nurse’s role in maintaining technologic devices. Heart Lung. 2000;29(1):60-69.
6.
Fraser GL, Riker RR, Prato S., Wilkins MLThe frequency and cost of patient-initiated device removal in the ICU. Pharmacotherapy. 2001;21(1):1-6.
7.
Eisenberg P. , Spies M., Metheny NACharacteristics of patient who remove their nasal feeding tube. Clin Nurse Spec. 1987;1(3):94-98.
8.
Atkins PM, Mion LC, Mendelson W., Palmer RM, Slomka J., Franko T.Characteristics and outcomes of patients who self-extubate from ventilatory support: a case-control study. Chest. 1997 ; 112:1317-1323.
9.
Betbese AJ, Perez M., Bak E., Rialp G., Mancebo J.A prospective study of unplanned endotracheal extubation in intensive care unit patients. Crit Care Med. 1998;26:1180-1186.
10.
Horsburgh D. , Rowat A., Mahoney C., Dennis M.A necessary evil? Interventions to prevent nasogastric tube-tugging after stroke. Br J Neurosci Nurs . 2008;4(5):230-234.
11.
Chang L., Wang KK, Chao Y.Influence of physical restraint on unplanned extubation of adult intensive care patients: A case-control study. Am J Crit Care. 2008;17(5):408-415.
12.
Carrión MI, Ayuso D., Marcos M., et al. Accidental removal of endotracheal and nasogastric tubes and intravascular catheters. Crit Care Med. 2000;28(1):63-66.
13.
McClave SA, Sexton LK, Spain DA, et al. Enteral tube feeding in the intensive care unit: factors impeding adequate delivery. Crit Care Med. 1999;27(7):1252-1256.
14.
McGuirt WF, Strout JJ"How I do it": head and neck. A targeted problem and its solution: securing of intermediate duration feeding tubes. Laryngoscope. 1980;90:2046-2048.
15.
Armstrong C. , Luther W., Sykes T.A technique for preventing extubation of feeding tubes: the bridle [ASPEN Fifth Clinical Congress abstract]. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 1980;4(6):603.
16.
Barrocas A. , Jastram C., St Romain C.The bridle: increasing the use of nasoenteric feeding. Nutr Support Serv. 1982;2(8):8-10.
17.
Sax HC, Bower RHMethod for securing nasogastric tubes in unco-operative patients. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1987;164:471-472.
18.
Meer JAA new nasal bridle for securing nasoenteral feeding tubes. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 1989;13(3):331-334.
19.
Zweng TN, Hill BB, Strodel WEAn improved technique for securing nasoenteral feeding tubes. J Am Coll Surg. 1996;183:269-270.
20.
Leong SC, Mahanta V.Securing the nasogastric tube in head and neck cancer patients. Laryngoscope. 2006;116:2089-2091.
21.
Levine JA, Morris JCThe use of a football helmet to secure a nasogastric tube. Nutrition. 1995;11(3):285.
22.
Gunn SR, Early BJ, Zenati MS, Ochoa JBUse of a nasal bridle prevents accidental nasoenteral feeding tube removal . JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr.2009;33(1):50-54.
23.
Johnston RD, O’Dell L., Patrick M., Cole AT, Cunliffe RNOutcome of patients fed via nasogastric tube retained with a bridle loop: do bridle loops reduce the requirement for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy insertion and 30 day mortality?Proc Nutr Soc. 2008;67:E116.
McClave SA, Chang W.Complications of enteral access. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;58(5):739-751.
29.
Metheny NA, Meert KL, Clouse REComplications related to feeding tube placement. Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2007;23:178-182.
30.
Fagerberg I. , Jonhagen METemporary confusion: a fearful experience . J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2002;9:339-346.
31.
Brandt CP, Mittendorf EAEndoscopic placement of nasojejunal feeding tubes in ICU patients. Surg Endosc. 1999;13:1211-1214.
32.
Hegazi R., Rolniak S., Centa P., et al. Effect of a nasal tube retention device (AMT Bridle) on frequency of nasojejunal feeding tube displacement. Nutr Clin Pract . 2008:23:197.
33.
Power S., Smyth N., Duggan S., Roddy S., Feehan S.The nasal bridle: a useful approach to prevent the dislodgement of feeding tubes. e-SPEN. 2010;5:e3-e76.
34.
Anderson MR , O’Connor M., Mayer P., O’Mahony D., Woodward J., Kane K.The nasal loop provides an alternative to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in high-risk dysphasic stroke patients. Clin Nutr. 2003;23:501-506.
35.
Khair S., Karanth S., Lawrence H., et al. A new era in enteral nutrition practice? Gut . 2008;57(suppl 1):A1-A172.
36.
Donaldson E. , Earley T., Shields PLThe nasal bridle: its place within an integrated nutrition service. A prospective audit of one year’s data. Gut. 2007;56(suppl2):A137.
37.
Seder CW, Janczyk R.The routine bridling of nasojejunal tubes is a safe and effective method of reducing dislodgement in the intensive care unit. Nutr Clin Pract. 2008;23(6):651-654.
