Breik Lina, Barker Lisa, Bauer Judy, Davidson Zoe E
Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, School of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Nutr Diet. 2024 Oct 25. doi: 10.1111/1747-0080.12912.
To explore the effect of blended tube feeding compared to conventional formulas on nutritional status, quality of life, anthropometry, diarrhoea and tube blockages in adults receiving tube feeding.
The protocol was registered (PROSPERO CRD42022372443). Five databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, CENTRAL) were searched from commencement of database to 14th June 2023 to identify studies comparing blended tube feeding to conventional formulas in adults receiving tube feeding. Certainty assessment was conducted using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tools and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations framework, and a narrative synthesis of results is provided.
From 4227 studies screened, eight were included (total n = 763 patients, 9-215 patients). Three studies were hospital-based and five were home-based with duration from 8 days-8 months. Blended tube feeding and conventional formulas were nutritionally equivalent in only three studies; energy and protein concentration of formulas ranged from 1.7-7.1 kJ/mL and 21-68.5 g/L for the blended tube feeding groups, and 4.2-6.7 kJ/mL and 39-100 g/L for the conventional groups. No studies assessed nutrition status or quality of life using validated measures. Blended tube feeding was associated with a clinically relevant reduction in diarrhoea with a low level of certainty. For remaining outcomes, there were inconclusive findings and an overall very low certainty of evidence for each.
The effect of blended tube feeding compared to conventional formulas on all outcomes remains uncertain. Blended tube feeding may reduce the incidence of diarrhoea. Future research using nutritionally equivalent comparisons and validated outcome measures is required.
