Premium
Efficacy of Tube Feeding in Supplying Energy Requirements of Hospitalized Patients
Author(s) -
Abernathy Gill B.,
Heizer William D.,
Holcombe Beverly J.,
Raasch Ralph H.,
Schlegel Kay E.,
Hak Lawrence J.
Publication year - 1989
Publication title -
journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.935
H-Index - 98
eISSN - 1941-2444
pISSN - 0148-6071
DOI - 10.1177/0148607189013004387
Subject(s) - feeding tube , medicine , discontinuation , calorie , parenteral nutrition , caloric intake , energy requirement , pediatrics , body weight , surgery , mathematics , statistics , regression
During a 6‐week period, all adult patients in a university hospital receiving ready‐to‐feed nasoenteric tube feeding formula were prospectively studied. The study objective was to determine each patient's caloric intake from tube feeding relative to their energy needs and to identify factors causing decreased feeding intake. Each of 35 patients was visited at least once daily to determine their volumetric intake of tube feeding formula. Daily review of patient care records and nursing interviews were used to identify interruptions in therapy. Patient's basal energy expenditures (BEE) were calculated using the Harris‐Benedict equation. Calorie goals were set by members of the Nutrition Support Service or clinical dietitians. Intakes averaged 1095 ± 41 Kcal (SEM) per day or 61% of their mean calorie goal of 1791 ± 41 Kcal. Mean daily calorie intake was statistically different ( p < 0.05) from mean energy goal on patient study days 1 through 5, 7, and 8. Only 16 of the 35 patients achieved an intake of 100% of their energy goal on any day of therapy. Calorie goals averaged 1.4 times BEE. Mean daily calorie intake did not exceed BEE until study day 10. Eighteen % of potential feeding time was lost due to temporary feeding interruptions; primarily inadvertent extubation (4.6%), gastrointestinal intolerance (4.7%), medical procedures requiring discontinuation of feeding (2.8%), and feeding tube positioning difficulties (1.5%). In addition, physicians ordered only 75% of calculated energy goals. These data indicate that tube feeding therapy, when provided under usual hospital conditions, does not meet patient's energy requirements. ( Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition 13: 387–391, 1989)