Ethnicity and socio-economic deprivation in children with intestinal failure in New Zealand: Disparities in incidence, but not in outcomes.

AIMS: The New Zealand National Intestinal Failure and Rehabilitation Service (NZ-NIFRS) was established in October 2015 to gather longitudinal data on the aetiology, clinical course and outcomes of children with intestinal failure (IF). One main objective is to achieve health equity for patients with IF in NZ. METHODS: Clinical outcomes (enteral autonomy, parenteral nutrition (PN) dependence, death or intestinal transplantation) for IF patients diagnosed from October 2015 to 2018 were analysed; comparisons were made by ethnicity and socio-economic status (SES) using published 'prioritised-ethnicity' health data and the NZ index of deprivation, respectively. The Cox proportional-hazards model was used to assess time to enteral autonomy. RESULTS: Of the 208 patients (55.77% male, 43.75% preterm), 170 (81.73%) achieved enteral autonomy and 14 (6.73%) remained PN dependent. Pacific and Maori children accounted for 12.98% and 27.88% of the patient cohort, respectively, compared to 9.46% and 25.65% of the NZ paediatric population. More significantly, IF patients with a high NZ socio-economic deprivation score were overrepresented, with 35.92% in the highest deprivation quintile and 10.19% in the least deprived quintile, compared to 23.53% and 20.31%, respectively, of the NZ paediatric population. There were no significant differences in primary clinical outcomes for any patients based on ethnicity or SES. CONCLUSION: While disparities in ethnicity and social deprivation do exist in the incidence of IF in NZ children, clinical outcomes are similar for children regardless of ethnicity or SES. NZ-NIFRS has achieved one of its core objectives: to achieve health equity for all patients with IF nationwide.

A clinical consensus paper on jejunal tube feeding in children.

BACKGROUND: Feeding problems are common in children with complex medical problems or acute critical illness and enteral nutrition may be required. In certain situations, gastric tube feeding is poorly tolerated or may not be feasible. When feed intolerance persists despite appropriate adjustments to oral and gastric enteral regimens, jejunal tube feeding can be considered as an option for nutrition support. METHODS: A multidisciplinary expert working group of the Australasian Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition was convened. They identified topic questions and five key areas of jejunal tube feeding in children. Literatures searches were undertaken on Pubmed, Embase, and Medline for all relevant studies, between January 2000 and September 2022 (n = 103). Studies were assessed using National Health and Medical Research Council guidelines to generate statements, which were discussed as a group, followed by voting on statements using a modified Delphi process to determine consensus. RESULTS: A total of 24 consensus statements were created for five key areas: patient selection, type and selection of feeding tube, complications, clinical use of jejunal tubes, follow-up, and reassessment. CONCLUSION: Jejunal tube feeding is a safe and effective means of providing nutrition in a select group of pediatric patients with complex medical needs, who are unable to be fed by gastric tube feeding. Appropriate patient selection is important as complications associated with jejunal tube feeding are not uncommon, and although mostly minor, can be significant or require tube reinsertion. All children receiving jejunal tube feeding should have multidisciplinary team assessment and follow-up.

Exclusive enteral nutrition: An optimal care pathway for use in children with active luminal Crohn's disease.

AIM: Exclusive enteral nutrition (EEN) is recommended as a first-line therapy for active luminal paediatric Crohn's disease, by many contemporary consensus guidelines. However, EEN protocols vary internationally. A key enabler for the use of EEN therapy has been identified as the standardisation of protocols. The aim of this study was to develop an optimal care pathway for use of EEN in children with active luminal Crohn's disease. METHODS: A working group of 11 paediatric gastroenterology dietitians and one paediatric gastroenterologist from Australia and New Zealand was convened to develop a standard optimal care pathway. Seven key areas were identified; clinical indications, workup assessments, EEN prescription, monitoring, food reintroduction, partial enteral nutrition and maintenance enteral nutrition. Recent literature was reviewed, assessed according to the National Health and Medical Research Council guidelines, and consensus statements were developed and voted on. Consensus opinion was used where literature gaps existed. RESULTS: A total of nineteen consensus statements from the seven key areas were agreed upon. The consensus statements informed the optimal care pathway for children with active luminal undertaking EEN in Australia and New Zealand. CONCLUSION: This study developed an EEN optimal care pathway to facilitate standardisation of clinical care for children with active luminal Crohn's disease, and hopefully improve clinical outcomes and identify areas for future research.

Exclusive enteral nutrition in children and adolescents with Crohn disease: Dietitian perspectives and practice.

AIM: In newly diagnosed paediatric Crohn disease, exclusive enteral nutrition (EEN) is recommended as a first-line treatment for remission induction. However, EEN protocols vary internationally. The development of best practice protocols may make it easier to make definitive conclusions about optimal EEN therapy, and may improve patient outcomes. This study aims to determine the variations in current dietitian EEN practice within Australia and New Zealand (NZ) to inform a common EEN protocol in the future, and to gather perspectives on the need for nutrition resources for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). METHODS: A questionnaire was created and emailed to paediatric dietitians working with gastroenterologists in public and private paediatric centres in Australia and NZ. Respondents were invited to provide details of their perspectives of EEN therapy and protocol details. RESULTS: Eighteen paediatric dietitians responded to the questionnaire, 10 from Australia and 8 from NZ. There was clear consensus between respondents on the duration of EEN being 6 and 8 weeks, the need for close dietitian supervision while on EEN, and the method of food reintroduction. There was lack of consensus between dietitians regarding permitted concomitant foods whilst on EEN. This study also determined a potential benchmarking relationship between IBD dietitian hours and numbers of patients on EEN per year in a centre. CONCLUSIONS: Paediatric dietitians in Australia and NZ are mostly aligned in their practice of EEN. Development of a standard EEN protocol, and patient IBD resources, will further align practice and allow for greater research possibilities.