Table Complications and adverse events of catheter-free monitoring compared with catheter-based monitoring in children Study Level and quality N Wireless pH monitoring Catheter-based pH monitoring p-value Croffie et al. Level II 16 participants Vomiting more than usual 6/18 (33%) Vomiting more than usual 3/16 (19%) 0.25 (2007) catheter group Quality: 14.5/25 Chest pain 7/18 (39%) Chest pain 1/16 (6%) 0.02 18 participants CX Throat pain 8/18 (44%) Throat pain 15/16 (94%) 0.001 wireless group P2 Oesophageal discomfort 7/18 (39%) Oesophageal discomfort 11/16 (69%) 0.06 Randomised Appetite on scale from 1–5: 3.54 Appetite on scale from 1–5: 2.72 0.029 controlled trial Activity on scale from 1–5: 3.66 Activity on scale from 1–5: 2.33 0.001 Overall satisfaction on scale from 1–5: 4.31 Overall satisfaction on scale from 1–5: 3.11 0.003
Table Complications and adverse events of catheter-free monitoring compared with catheter-based monitoring in children Study Level and quality N Wireless pH monitoring Catheter-based pH monitoring p-value Croffie et al. (2007) Level II Quality: 14.5/25 CX P2 Randomised controlled trial 16 participants catheter group 18 participants wireless group Vomiting more than usual 6/18 (33%) Chest pain 7/18 (39%) Throat pain 8/18 (44%) Oesophageal discomfort 7/18 (39%) Appetite on scale from 1–5: 3.54 Activity on scale from 1–5: 3.66 Overall satisfaction on scale from 1–5: 4.31 Vomiting more than usual 3/16 (19%) Chest pain 1/16 (6%) Throat pain 15/16 (94%) Oesophageal discomfort 11/16 (69%) Appetite on scale from 1–5: 2.72 Activity on scale from 1–5: 2.33 Overall satisfaction on scale from 1–5: 3.11 0.25 0.02 0.001 0.06 0.029 0.001 0.003