Korai Andriana, Thomson Isabella, Carey Sharon, Allman-Farinelli Margaret
Nutrition and Dietetics Group, Sydney Nursing School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.
Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2025 Mar;79(2):104-112. doi: 10.1038/s41430-024-01500-1. Epub 2024 Sep 3.
Home Enteral Tube Feeding (HETF) is a viable option for people within primary care settings when oral intake is insufficient to meet nutritional needs. As HETF is not a risk-free therapy, guidelines exist to enable its safe provision. This review aims to summarise existing guidelines and their recommendations pertaining to the provision of HETF and appraise their methodological quality. A systematic review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews, PRISMA-checklist and a 2019 methodological guide specific to the review of clinical practice guidelines (PROSPERO registration: CRD42023456223). Records were sourced from five bibliographical databases (Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, Scopus, Cinahl) and the grey literature (64 websites, seven guideline repositories). The AGREE-II tool was applied to eligible guidelines. The recommendations of guidelines meeting a predetermined threshold score (domain 3 'rigour of development' score >70%) were extracted, grouped, and assessed using the AGREE-REX tool. A total of 2707 records were screened with 15 guidelines meeting eligibility criteria. The median (IQR) overall AGREE-II score (/7) of all guidelines was 3 (3-5) and only 3/15 guidelines achieved a domain 3 score >70%. The median (IQR) overall AGREE-REX score was 33% (26-37%). No recommendation group achieved a domain score above 70%. No guideline or recommendation group was suggested for use without modification. Key limitations included suboptimal stakeholder involvement and implementability, and lack of methodological transparency. Current HETF guidelines inadequately align with methodological standards. This review highlights key areas HETF guideline developers should consider to create more relevant and implementable guidelines.
当经口摄入量不足以满足营养需求时,家庭肠内管饲(HETF)是基层医疗环境中人们的一种可行选择。由于HETF并非无风险治疗方法,因此存在相关指南以确保其安全实施。本综述旨在总结与HETF实施相关的现有指南及其建议,并评估其方法学质量。根据《Cochrane系统评价手册》、PRISMA清单以及2019年临床实践指南评价专用方法指南进行了系统评价(PROSPERO注册编号:CRD42023456223)。记录来源于五个书目数据库(Medline、Embase、PsychINFO、Scopus、Cinahl)和灰色文献(64个网站、七个指南库)。AGREE-II工具应用于符合条件的指南。提取达到预定阈值分数(领域3“制定的严谨性”分数>70%)的指南的建议,进行分组,并使用AGREE-REX工具进行评估。共筛选了2707条记录,15条指南符合纳入标准。所有指南的AGREE-II总分中位数(四分位间距)(/7)为3(3-5),只有3/15的指南领域3分数>70%。AGREE-REX总分中位数(四分位间距)为33%(26-37%)。没有一个建议组的领域分数超过70%。没有指南或建议组被建议不经修改直接使用。主要局限性包括利益相关者参与度和可实施性欠佳,以及缺乏方法学透明度。当前的HETF指南与方法学标准的契合度不足。本综述强调了HETF指南制定者在制定更相关且可实施的指南时应考虑的关键领域。