Enteral nutrition (EN) is a valuable clinical intervention for patients of all ages in a variety of care settings. Along with its many outcome benefits come the potential for adverse effects. These safety issues are the result of clinical complications and of process-related errors. The latter can occur at any step from patient assessment, prescribing, and order review, to product selection, labeling, and administration. To maximize the benefits of EN while minimizing adverse events requires that a systematic approach of care be in place. This includes open communication, standardization, and incorporation of best practices into the EN process. This document provides recommendations based on the available evidence and expert consensus for safe practices, across each step of the process, for all those involved in caring for patients receiving EN.

Enteral access feeding devices are placed in patients who have a functional and accessible gastrointestinal (GI) tract but are not able to consume or absorb enough nutrients to sustain adequate nutrition and hydration. For many individuals, enteral nutrition support is a lifesaving modality to prevent or treat a depleted nutrient state that can lead to tissue breakdown, compromised immune function, and poor wound healing. Psychological well-being is also affected with malnutrition and dehydration, triggering feelings of apathy, depression, fatigue, and loss of morale, negatively impacting a patient's ability for self-care. A variety of existing devices can be placed through the nares, mouth, stomach or small intestine to provide liquid nutrition, fluids, and medications directly to the GI tract. If indicated, some of the larger-bore devices may be used for gastric decompression and drainage. These enteral access devices need to be cared for properly to avert patient discomfort, mechanical device-related complications, and interruptions in the delivery of needed nutrients, hydration, and medications. Clinicians who seek knowledge about enteral access devices and actively participate in the selection and care of these devices will be an invaluable resource to any healthcare team. This article will review the types, care, proper positioning, and replacement schedules of the various enteral access devices, along with the prevention and troubleshooting of potential problems.

Routine transpyloric placement of feeding tubes reduces aspiration in intensive care unit patients. Spontaneous passage eliminates the need for radiologic or endoscopic intervention. It is unclear whether the addition of a weight to the end of the tube or the use of the prokinetic agent metoclopramide in the conventional dose (10 mg) improves spontaneous transpyloric placement. In a randomized, prospective trial, 39 intensive care unit patients (age > 2 years) had a total of 50 nasoenteral tubes placed after intravenous metoclopramide (20 mg in adults, 0.2 mg/kg in children). The tubes were 8 French in diameter with either a weighted end or an unweighted bullet tip. Tip position was confirmed radiographically within 4 hours after blinded placement and at 1 and 2 days if spontaneous passage had not occurred. At 4 hours, 36% of the weighted tubes and 84% of the unweighted tubes (p < .002) had passed through the pylorus. At 1 day, 48% of the weighted tubes and 86% of the unweighted tubes (p < .007) had achieved transpyloric position. At 2 days, 56% and 92% of the weighted and unweighted tubes, respectively, had passed through the pylorus (p < .009, chi 2). The occurrence of transpyloric passage and the rapidity at which it occurred was significantly greater for the unweighted tube during all time periods. A poststudy trial was conducted to evaluate the effect of the normal dose of metoclopramide (10 mg in adults and 0.1 mg/kg in children) and the transpyloric passage of the unweighted feeding tube. Twenty-five patients received 10 mg of metoclopramide before the insertion of the unweighted tube.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

No abstract

No abstract