School of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University, Australia (Drs Perumbil Pathrose, Psalia, Schmied, and Dahlen, Taylor, Foster and Associate Professor Spence Kay); NSW Centre for Evidence Based Health Care: A Joanna Briggs Institute Affiliated Group (Drs Taylor and Foster); Ingham Institute Australia (Dr Foster); Grace Centre, Children's Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia (Dr Badawi, Associate Professor Spence Kaye); Women's and Newborn Health, Research and Innovation, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (Dr Gregory); and Life's Little Treasures Foundation, Ringwood, Victoria, Australia (Peters).
Adv Neonatal Care. 2021 Oct 1;21(5):418-424. doi: 10.1097/ANC.0000000000000822.
Preterm infants routinely require enteral feeding via nasogastric or orogastric tubes as an alternative to oral feeding to meet their nutritional needs. Anecdotal evidence suggests variations in practice related to correct tube placement and assessment of feed intolerance.
To determine the current practices of enteral feeding tube placement confirmation and gastric residual (GR) aspiration of neonatal clinicians in Australia.
A cross-sectional online survey comprising 24 questions was distributed to nursing and medical health professionals working in Australian neonatal care units through 2 e-mail listservs made available by professional organizations.
The survey was completed by 129 clinicians. A single method was practiced by 50% of the clinicians in confirming tube placement, and most common practice was assessing the pH of GR aspirate. The majority of respondents (96%) reported that they relied on GR aspiration and clinical signs to determine feeding tolerance and subsequent decisions such as ceasing or decreasing feeds. However, the frequency of aspiration, the amount and color of aspirate considered to be normal/abnormal, and decisions on whether to replace gastric aspirate or whether aspiration should be performed during continuous tube feeding varied.
This study demonstrated considerable variability in clinical practice for enteral feeding tube placement confirmation and GR aspiration despite most respondents reporting using a unit-based clinical practice guideline. Our study findings highlight the need for not only developing evidence-based practice guidelines for safe and consistent clinical practice but also ensuring that these guidelines are followed by all clinicians.
Further research is needed to establish evidence-based methods both for enteral feeding tube placement confirmation and for the assessment of feeding intolerance during tube feeding. In addition, the reasons why evidence-based methods are not followed must be investigated.
早产儿通常需要通过鼻胃管或口胃管进行肠内喂养,以替代口服喂养来满足其营养需求。有传闻证据表明,与正确的置管和评估喂养不耐受相关的实践存在差异。
确定澳大利亚新生儿临床医生肠内喂养管放置确认和胃残留(GR)抽吸的当前实践。
通过两个专业组织提供的 2 个电子邮件列表服务,向澳大利亚新生儿护理单位工作的护理和医疗保健专业人员分发了一份包含 24 个问题的横断面在线调查。
共有 129 名临床医生完成了调查。50%的临床医生采用单一方法确认管置,最常见的做法是评估 GR 抽吸物的 pH 值。大多数受访者(96%)报告说,他们依赖 GR 抽吸和临床体征来确定喂养耐受性,以及随后的决定,如停止或减少喂养。然而,抽吸的频率、被认为正常/异常的抽吸物的量和颜色,以及关于是否更换胃抽吸物或是否应该在连续管饲期间进行抽吸的决定存在差异。
尽管大多数受访者报告使用基于单位的临床实践指南,但本研究表明,在肠内喂养管放置确认和 GR 抽吸方面,临床实践存在相当大的差异。我们的研究结果强调,不仅需要制定安全和一致的临床实践循证实践指南,而且还需要确保所有临床医生都遵循这些指南。
需要进一步研究,以建立肠内喂养管放置确认和管饲期间喂养不耐受评估的循证方法。此外,还必须调查为什么不遵循循证方法的原因。