Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy–a user's perspective

Sixteen patients receiving percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding following a period of nasogastric (NG) feeding were investigated to assess acceptance and identify problems by means of a questionnaire. PEG was considered to be superior to NG feeding in terms of tolerance and cosmetic acceptance by 81% and 88% of participants respectively ( P < 0.001). Pain was an infrequent problem. Interruptions to feeding were consideed to be more common with NG feeding by 50% of participants; 38% considered interruptions equally common with both PEG and NG, and 12% considered interruptions more common with PEG feeding ( P = NS). The time for care was equivalent for both methods. Seventy-five percent considered PEG to have made a valuable contribution to enteral feeding. Leakage was however considered to be more frequent in PEG feeding by 81% of participants (compared to 12% who considered leakage to be more common with NG feeding; P < 0.001) and leakage was more frequent at die junctions in the catheter rather than from the stoma. Thirty-one percent of patients with PEG had needed systemic antibiotics for stomal infections. All patients with both PEG and NG feeding needed professional help. Sixty-two percent needed professional help more frequently with PEG than with NG feeding (compared to 19% who considered that the NG tube needed professional help more frequently; P <0.05). We conclude that leakage and infections are major problems in PEG enteral feeding.