Devices and techniques for bedside enteral feeding tube placement.

Enteral feedings are an integral part of care for many hospitalized patients. Accessing the gastrointestinal (GI) tract safely and in a timely manner can be challenging. Various techniques and devices to enhance the safety of bedside feeding tube placement are available for clinicians. Three specific devices are highlighted, including the colorimetric CO(2) detector (CCD), a magnetically guided feeding tube (MGFT), and the electromagnetic tube placement device (ETPD). The CO(2) detector is applied to detect the presence or absence of CO(2), thus assisting in correct placement of the feeding tube tip into the GI tract vs the lung. The MGFT uses a magnetic device to manipulate the feeding tube through the GI tract into the small intestine. The ETPD provides real-time visualization of the feeding tube as it progresses into the small intestine. Training and repetition are essential for safe and successful feeding tube placement, and the highlighted devices can contribute to both of these goals.     

Bedside electromagnetic-guided feeding tube placement: an improvement over traditional placement technique?

BACKGROUND: Registered dietitian/registered nurse (RD/RN) teams were created to place small bowel feeding tubes (SBFT) at the bedside in intensive care unit (ICU) patients using an electromagnetic tube placement device (ETPD). The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the safety of placing feeding tubes at the ICU bedside using an ETPD. Secondary outcomes included success rate, cost, and timeliness of feeding initiation. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively on 20 SBFT blind placements in ICU patients (control group). After implementing a protocol for RD/RN teams to place SBFTs with an ETPD, 81 SBFTs were placed (study group). Complications, success rate, number of x-rays after tube placement, x-ray cost, and time from physician order to initiation of feedings were compared between the groups. RESULTS: No adverse events occurred in either group. Successful SBFT placement was 63% (12/19) in the control group and 78% (63/81) in the study group (not significant, NS). The median time between physician order for tube placement and feeding initiation decreased from 22.3 hours (control group) to 7.8 hours (study group, p = .003). The median number of x-rays to confirm correct placement was 1 in the study group compared with 2 in the control group (p = .0001), resulting in a 50% decrease in the mean cost for x-rays. CONCLUSIONS: No adverse events occurred with the implementation of bedside feeding tube placement using an ETPD. In addition, SBFT placement with an ETPD by designated ICU RD/RN teams resulted in lower x-ray costs and more timely initiation of enteral feedings compared with blind placement.     

Prospective randomised comparison of traditional, personal bedside and problem-oriented practical dermatology courses

PURPOSE: This paper reports a prospective, randomised study comparing a problem-oriented practical (POP) course based on paper cases to a personal bedside teaching (PBT) practical course and a standard practical course. METHODS: During 2 consecutive terms, students were randomly allocated to either 2 POP groups/term (n = 10/group), 2 PBT groups/term (n = 10/group) or the standard practical course, which consisted of a rotating system of lectures and bedside teaching with randomly appointed tutors. Each course was evaluated with the same 12-item questionnaire and multiple-choice test administered at the beginning and end of the course. RESULTS: The numbers of students evaluated were 36 for the POP groups, 37 for the PBT groups, and 155 for the standard course. The PBT and POP courses were rated significantly better (P < 0.001) than the standard course for all items. Aggregate marks (mean +/- SD) were: 1.59 +/- 0.8 for the POP course; 1.69 +/- 0.68 for the PBT course, and 2.71 +/- 0.98 for the standard course. There were no significant differences between the POP and PBT courses. Significantly better learning rates as indicated by an increase in the number of correctly answered questions were observed in students attending the POP and PBT courses. CONCLUSION: This prospective study demonstrated that there was no difference in the rating of a POP course and a bedside teaching course by students randomly assigned to 1 of 3 different pedagogical approaches. Furthermore, both alternative options achieved better ratings than the standard course, which is current teaching practice in our medical school. The PBT and POP approaches provided superior learning success and POP helped solve the problems of standardisation and patient recruitment.     

Gastrostomy tube placement outcomes: comparison of surgical, endoscopic, and laparoscopic methods.

BACKGROUND: Advances in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and laparoscopic (LAP) techniques now allow for less invasive placement of gastrostomy tubes. This study compared morbidities and feeding outcomes of these procedures with standard surgical (OPEN) insertion. METHODS: Gastrostomy tubes placed in the operating room by the PEG, LAP, and OPEN methods were compared for insertion times, tube insertion and maintenance complications, enteral feeding complications, and feeding start days. Patients with concomitant intra-abdominal procedures were excluded. Patients were followed for 6 days after tube placement. RESULTS: A total of 91 catheters (PEG = 23, LAP = 39, OPEN = 29) were inserted in the operating room for indications of ventilator-dependent respiratory failure (45), dysphagia (30), head and neck cancer (9), and decreased mental status (7). No patients were fed on the day of the procedure. Insertion times were significantly longer (p < .05) in the OPEN technique (68 minutes) vs LAP (48 minutes) and PEG (30 minutes). Insertion complications occurred in the LAP and PEG cohorts (3 failed LAP, 1 failed PEG), and maintenance complications were higher in the LAP group, including 1 episode each of cellulitis, bleeding, and serous drainage. Twenty enteral feeding complications in 17 patients occurred in all groups (9 in LAP vs 6 in PEG and 5 in OPEN), and included emesis (6), high residual (5), diarrhea (3), ileus (3), nausea (2), and pain after feeding (1). Overall complications were significantly lower in the PEG (7) and OPEN (5) groups compared with the LAP group (15). Feeding start day was significantly delayed in the OPEN technique (2.1 days vs 1.7 in PEG and 1.5 in LAP); however, no difference was found in days to goal among groups (4.4-4.8 days). CONCLUSIONS: PEG should be the procedure of choice for placement of gastrostomy tubes. If PEG is contraindicated, then OPEN technique may be best due to fewer complications, although insertion time is longer than the LAP technique.     

Small bowel feeding tube placement using an electromagnetic tube placement device: accuracy of tip location

Background: An electromagnetic tube placement device (ETPD) monitors tip position of feeding tubes (FT) during placement in the digestive tract. It helps to avoid airway misplacement and permits positioning into the small bowel (SB). This study compares the overall agreement between FT tip location as determined by an ETPD vs an abdominal radiograph of the kidneys, ureter, and bladder (KUB). Methods: Using an ETPD, A nurse placed postpyloric FTs in ICU patients. We included all patients in whom the ETPD was used for FT placement. Data were prospectively recorded for 255 days on the rate of successful postpyloric placement, ETPD estimated tip location, and KUB location. Results: 860 tubes were placed in 616 patients, 719 (83.6%) of which recorded for ETPD and KUB. According to the KUB, 81% of tubes were in the SB; however, ETPD suggested 89% were beyond the pylorus. There was moderate agreement beyond what could be attributed to chance between KUB and ETPD tip locations (475 [66.1%], κ score 0.62 [95% confidence interval 0.58–0.67]). More tubes by KUB were distal (134[18.6%]) vs proximal (110[15.3%]) to the suspected location by ETPD (P < .0001. Tubes in or distal to the second half of the duodenum, according to ETPD were rarely in the stomach (<1%). No tubes were proximal to the stomach or placed into the airway. Conclusions: The strong agreement between KUB and ETPD, when tubes were believed to be in the second part of the duodenum or beyond, suggests that KUB is necessary only when the FT tip is suspected to be in the proximal duodenum.     

Prophylactic pancreatic enzymes to reduce feeding tube occlusions.

BACKGROUND: Small-bore, feeding tube occlusion is reported to be as high as 23% to 35%. Pancreatic enzyme solution has been used to dissolve internal clots in feeding tubes. This study examined the prophylactic use of pancreatic enzyme solution with continuous enteral feeding in critically ill patients. METHODS: This was a randomized, unblinded trial conducted in an intensive care unit at a tertiary care hospital. Feeding tubes were randomized to receive pancreatic enzyme solution every 4 hours or usual care. Pancreatic enzyme solution contained lipase 8,000 units, amylase 30,000 units, protease activity 30,000 units, sodium bicarbonate 300 mg, and 5 mL warm sterile water. RESULTS: Ninety-five feeding tubes were followed up in 101 patients. Ten feeding tubes (9.9%) developed primary occlusions. Analysis revealed 2/52 (4%) of the tubes in the enzyme arm had occlusions, whereas 8/49 (16%) of control tubes had occlusions (p = .04). Time to occlusion was significantly longer in the pancreatic enzyme arm (p = .02). CONCLUSIONS: The use of prophylactic pancreatic enzymes may reduce the incidence of feeding tube occlusions.     

Verification of an electromagnetic placement device compared with abdominal radiograph to predict accuracy of feeding tube placement

Background: Use of an electromagnetic placement device (EMPD) facilitates placement of feeding tubes at the bedside. Standard practice for verification of feeding tube placement is via radiographic confirmation. The purpose of this research study was to assess the accuracy of placement of small‐bore feeding tubes (SBFTs) as determined by EMPD interpretation compared with that of abdominal radiograph verification by a radiologist. Methods: This multicenter prospective study enrolled patients requiring bedside feeding tube placement. SBFTs were placed by an experienced investigator using the EMPD. Two abdominal radiographs were then obtained: one after initial SBFT placement and an additional radiograph after injection of contrast. Documentation of location based on clinician interpretation using the EMPD was then compared with radiologist interpretation. Results: The final sample size was 194 patients, including 18 pediatric patients. Patient age ranged from 12 days to 102 years. Median time for tube placement was 12 minutes. Of the 194 patients, only 1 patient had data showing discrepancies between the original EMPD verification and the final abdominal radiograph interpretation, providing a 99.5% agreement. No patient experienced complications during SBFT placement, and 15 patients had inadvertent airway placement that was avoided with the use of the EMPD. Conclusions: There was a high percentage of agreement between EMPD and radiologic interpretation after contrast injection. The EMPD aided in avoiding inadvertent airway placement, with no patient complications. This device can be used safely at the bedside to facilitate placement of feeding tubes, leading to the delivery of early enteral nutrition.     

Comparison of a novel surface laser scanning anthropometric technique to traditional methods for facial parameter measurements

This study was designed to determine if three-dimensional (3D) laser scanning techniques could be used to collect accurate anthropometric measurements, compared with traditional methods. The use of an alternative 3D method would allow for quick collection of data that could be used to change the parameters used for facepiece design, improving fit and protection for a wider variety of faces. In our study, 10 facial dimensions were collected using both the traditional calipers and tape method and a Konica-Minolta Vivid9i laser scanner. Scans were combined using RapidForm XOR software to create a single complete facial geometry of the subject as a triangulated surface with an associated texture image from which to obtain measurements. A paired t-test was performed on subject means in each measurement by method. Nine subjects were used in this study: five males (one African-American and four Caucasian females) and four females displaying a range of facial dimensions. Five measurements showed significant differences (p<0.05), with most accounted for by subject movements or amended by scanning technique modifications. Laser scanning measurements showed high precision and accuracy when compared with traditional methods. Significant differences found can be very small changes in measurements and are unlikely to present a practical difference. The laser scanning technique demonstrated reliable and quick anthropometric data collection for use in future projects in redesigning respirators.     

Acute complications associated with bedside placement of feeding tubes.

Several types of feeding tubes can be placed at a patient's bedside; examples include nasogastric, nasointestinal, gastrostomy, and jejunostomy tubes. Nasoenteral tubes can be placed blindly at bedside or with the assistance of placement devices. Nasoenteric tubes can also be placed via fluoroscopy and endoscopy. Gastrostomy and jejunostomy tubes can be placed using endoscopic techniques. This paper will describe the indications and contraindications for different types of tubes that can be placed at the bedside and complications associated with tube placement. Complications associated with nasoenteral tubes include inadvertent malpositioning of the tube, epistaxis, sinusitis, inadvertent tube removal, tube clogging, tube-feeding-associated diarrhea, and aspiration pneumonia. Complications from percutaneous gastrostomy and jejunostomy tube placements include procedure-related mishaps, site infection, leakage, buried bumper syndrome, tube malfunction, and inadvertent removal. These complications will be reviewed, along with a discussion of incidence, cause, treatment, and prevention approaches.     

Person-centered feeding care: A protocol to re-introduce oral feeding for nursing home patients with tube feeding

Background

Although the literature on nursing home (NH) patients with tube feeding (TF) has focused primarily on the continuation vs. discontinuation of TF, the reassessment of these patients for oral feeding has been understudied. Re-assessing patients for oral feeding may be better received by families and NH staff than approaches focused on stopping TF, and may provide an opportunity to address TF in less cognitively impaired patients as well as those with end-stage conditions. However, the literature contains little guidance on a systematic interdisciplinary team approach to the oral feeding reassessment of patients with TF, who are admitted to NHs.

Methods

This project had two parts that were conducted in one 170-bed intermediate/skilled, Medicare-certified NH in Honolulu, Hawai‘i. Part 1 consisted of a retrospective observational study of characteristics of TF patients versus non-tube fed patients at NH admission (2003-2006) and longitudinal follow-up (through death or 6/30/2011) with usual care of the TF patients for outcomes of: feeding and swallowing reassessment, goals of care reassessment, feeding status (TF and/or per oral (PO) feedings), and hospice status. Part 2 involved the development of an interdisciplinary TF reassessment protocol through working group discussions and a pilot test of the protocol on a new set of patients admitted with TF from 2011-2014.

Results

Part 1: Of 238 admitted patients, 13.4% (32/238) had TF. Prior stroke and lack of DNR status was associated with increased likelihood of TF. Of the 32 patients with TF at NH admission, 15 could communicate and interact (mild, moderate or no cognitive impairment with prior stroke or pneumonia); while 17 were nonverbal and/or bedbound patients (advanced cognitive impairment or terminal disease). In the more cognitively intact group, 9/15 (60%) were never reassessed for tolerance of oral diets and 10/15 (66.7%) remained with TF without any oral feeding until death. Of the end-stage group, 13/17 (76.5%) did not have goals of care reassessed and remained with TF without oral feeding until death. Part 2: The protocol pilot project included all TF patients admitted to the facility in 2011-2014 (N=33). Of those who were more cognitively intact (n=22), 21/22 (95.5%) had swallowing reassessed, 11/22 (50%) resumed oral feedings but 11 (50%) failed reassessment and continued exclusive TF. Of those with end-stage disease (n=11), 100% had goals of care reassessed and 9 (81.8%) families elected individualized oral feeding (with or without TF).

Conclusion

Using findings from our retrospective study of usual care, our NH’s interdisciplinary team developed and pilot-tested a protocol that successfully reintroduced oral feedings to tube-fed NH patients who previously would not have resumed oral feeding.

     

A comparison of response rate and time according to the survey methods used: A randomized controlled trial

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of recorded and standard deliveries, and stamped and franked return envelopes in a postal survey of Korean–Vietnam veterans. Nine hundred veterans were randomly divided into four subgroups. A randomized controlled trial was conducted for two mailing strategies. The 52 study subjects to whom mail was undeliverable and 36 additional study subjects found not to be residing at the listed addresses were excluded from the study. The 699 (86%) surveys were returned within 39 business days after the first mailing. The response rate for the recorded delivery (88%) was significantly higher than that of the standard delivery (82%)(p = 0.03), and the response rate of the stamped return envelops (88%) was higher than that of the franked return envelops (85%)(p = 0.27). The replies for the recorded and standard deliveries arrived an average of 10.2 and 9.9 business days, respectively, after the first mailing (p = 0.60). The average times of the responses for the stamped and franked return envelopes were 9.8 and 10.4 business days, respectively (p = 0.25). Recorded deliveries significantly increased the response rate compared to standard deliveries, and stamped return envelops slightly increased the response rate a little compared to franked return envelops. The timing of response of recorded deliveries was similar to that of standard deliveries but the volume of response of recorded deliveries was higher than that of standard deliveries.This revised was published online in April 2005. In the previous version the article category was missing.     

Enteral tube feeding in a cohort of chronic hemodialysis patients.

Malnutrition affects up to half of all chronic dialysis patients and is an important predictor of mortality, but the efficacy of interventions designed to improve the nutritional status of dialysis patients has been poorly studied. Specifically, although enteral tube feeding is often cited as an important option in the treatment of malnourished dialysis patients, there are few studies examining the effectiveness and complications of enteral tube feedings in adults on dialysis. We performed a retrospective analysis of a small cohort (n = 10) of chronic hemodialysis patients who received enteral tube feeding as all or part of their nutrition between January 1 and May 1, 1999, with follow-up through May 1, 2000, to assess the efficacy and complications of enteral tube feeding. Six patients received feeding via a peritoneoscopically placed (PEG) tube, 3 via nasogastric (NG) tube, and 1 patient was switched from PEG to NG feeding after an exit site infection developed at her PEG site. Seven patients received enteral feeding because of swallowing difficulties occurring after a cerebrovascular accident. Four patients were fed via enteral tube temporarily (相似文献   

A randomized controlled trial comparing three different techniques of nasojejunal feeding tube placement in critically ill children

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to compare 3 different techniques used to place nasojejunal (NJ) feeding tubes in the critically ill or injured pediatric patients. This was a randomized, prospective trial in a university-affiliated 12-bed pediatric intensive care unit. Patients were critically ill children requiring placement of an NJ feeding tube. Patient age, weight, medications, use of mechanical ventilation, and patient tolerance were recorded. An abdominal radiograph obtained immediately after the placement determined correct placement. The final placement was recorded, as was the number of placement attempts. METHODS: Patients were randomized to 1 of 3 groups: standard technique, standard technique facilitated with gastric insufflation, and standard technique facilitated with the use of preinsertion erythromycin. To ensure equal distribution, all patients were stratified by weight (<10 kg vs > or =10 kg) before randomization. All NJ tubes were placed by one of the investigators. If unsuccessful, a second attempt by the same investigator was allowed. Successful placement of the NJ tube was defined by confirmation of the tip of the tube in the first part of the duodenum or beyond by a pediatric radiologist blinded to the treatment groups. RESULTS: Seventy-five pediatric patients were enrolled in the study; 94.6% (71/75) of tubes were passed successfully into the small bowel on the first or second attempt. Evaluation of the data revealed no significant association with a specific technique and successful placement (p = .1999). CONCLUSIONS: When placed by a core group of experienced operators, the majority of NJ feeding tubes can be placed in critically ill or injured children on the first or second attempt, regardless of the technique used.     

A 3-month survey of enteral tube feeding and parenteral feeding: a baseline for improvement

This paper presents the results of a 3-month survey of tube feeding and parenteral nutrition in hospital in-patients, undertaken to provide information for the development of guidelines by the Hospitals Nutritional Advisory Group and a baseline for future monitoring. This represents the first steps in the audit cycle. The results highlighted the following problems.

• 1. 

  Total parenteral nutrition is often continued after bowel sounds have returned.
• 2. 

  Enteral tube feeding is often instituted for only a very short period of time and may be of little nutritional benefit to the patient.
• 3. 

  Significantly lower amounts of energy and nitrogen are received by the patients in the enterally tube-fed group than is indicated by their estimated energy and nitrogen requirements.
• 4. 

  The medical staff noted the start of feeding in 60% of the case notes, however, the aims of feeding and the reason for commencing feeding were never documented. Nutritional aims were defined in the case notes by dietitians for all tube-fed and 18 of the 20 patients who were parenterally fed.

     

Placement of a duodenal feeding tube via gastrostoma with fiberoptic bronchoscope.

We report a case of esophageal disruption that required a duodenal feeding tube. Because of collapse of the gastric outlet secondary to severe emaciation, several attempts to place a tube into the duodenum via gastrostoma had ended in failure. We finally were able to accomplish it with the aid of a fiberoptic bronchoscope and a Swan-Ganz catheter. The procedure is described and discussed.