A cross-sectional survey of enteral feeding tube placement and gastric residual aspiration practices: Need for an evidence-based clinical practice guideline
Advances in Neonatal Care, ISSN: 1536-0911, Vol: 21, Issue: 5, Page: 418-424
2021
- 6Citations
- 23Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations6
- Citation Indexes4
- CrossRef2
- Policy Citations2
- Policy Citation2
- Captures23
- Readers23
- 20
Review Description
Background: 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. Purpose: To determine the current practices of enteral feeding tube placement confirmation and gastric residual (GR) aspiration of neonatal clinicians in Australia. Methods: 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. Findings: 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. Implication for practice: 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. Implication for research: 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.
Bibliographic Details
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know