A prospective observational study of pH testing to confirm ongoing nasogastric tube position.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To measure the reliability of pH testing to confirm ongoing nasogastric tube (NGT) position and to document associated complications. BACKGROUND: Confirming NGT position is essential, as use of an incorrectly positioned tube can cause harm. Substantial evidence examines initial confirmation of NGT position, yet limited evidence exists considers NGT displacement which is identified via ongoing NGT position tests. In the NHS, pH testing is recommended to confirm ongoing NGT position; however, there may be an association with excess X-rays and missed enteral nutrition and/or medications. DESIGN: Prospective observational study using STROBE checklist. METHODS: Data collected from medical records of 136 patients with NGTs in a London NHS Trust included pH tests, test results and complications related to ongoing pH tests which failed to confirm the tube was positioned in the stomach, that is, X-rays, and disruptions to enteral nutrition and medication. Cohen's Kappa determined pH test reliability. RESULTS: Of 1381 pH tests conducted to confirm NGT position, five (0.3%) correctly identified an NGT displacement, and one (0.07%) failed to identify displacement before use. The reliability of ongoing pH tests using Cohen's Kappa was minimal (0.29). Ongoing pH tests that failed to confirm a correctly positioned NGT led to 31 (22.8%) patients having X-rays, 24 (17.6%) missing >10% of prescribed enteral nutrition and 25 (18.4%) missing a critical medication. CONCLUSION: Ongoing NGT position testing using pH tests did not prevent the use of a displaced tube, and more than one-fifth of patients required X-rays to confirm a correctly position NGT, contributing to missed medications and enteral nutrition. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Caution should be used when confirming ongoing NGT position with a pH test. Future guidelines should balance the risk of using a displaced tube with potential delays to nutrition and/or medication. More research is needed to explore alternative methods of ongoing NGT position testing.

Dietary advice with or without oral nutritional supplements for disease-related malnutrition in adults.

BACKGROUND: Disease-related malnutrition has been reported in 10% to 55% of people in hospital and the community and is associated with significant health and social-care costs. Dietary advice (DA) encouraging consumption of energy- and nutrient-rich foods rather than oral nutritional supplements (ONS) may be an initial treatment. OBJECTIVES: To examine evidence that DA with/without ONS in adults with disease-related malnutrition improves survival, weight, anthropometry and quality of life (QoL). SEARCH METHODS: We identified relevant publications from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearching. Last search: 01 March 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of DA with/without ONS in adults with disease-related malnutrition in any healthcare setting compared with no advice, ONS or DA alone. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias, extracted data and graded evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 94, mostly parallel, RCTs (102 comparisons; 10,284 adults) across many conditions possibly explaining the high heterogeneity.  Participants were mostly older people in hospital, residential care and the community, with limited reporting on their sex. Studies lasted from one month to 6.5 years.  DA versus no advice - 24 RCTs (3523 participants) Most outcomes had low-certainty evidence. There may be little or no effect on mortality after three months, RR 0.87 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 2.96), or at later time points. We had no three-month data, but advice may make little or no difference to hospitalisations, or days in hospital after four to six months and up to 12 months. A similar effect was seen for complications at up to three months, MD 0.00 (95% CI -0.32 to 0.32) and between four and six months. Advice may improve weight after three months, MD 0.97 kg (95% CI 0.06 to 1.87) continuing at four to six months and up to 12 months; and may result in a greater gain in fat-free mass (FFM) after 12 months, but not earlier. It may also improve global QoL at up to three months, MD 3.30 (95% CI 1.47 to 5.13), but not later. DA versus ONS - 12 RCTs (852 participants) All outcomes had low-certainty evidence. There may be little or no effect on mortality after three months, RR 0.66 (95% CI 0.34 to 1.26), or at later time points. Either intervention may make little or no difference to hospitalisations at three months, RR 0.36 (95% CI 0.04 to 3.24), but ONS may reduce hospitalisations up to six months. There was little or no difference between groups in weight change at three months, MD -0.14 kg (95% CI -2.01 to 1.74), or between four to six months. Advice (one study) may lead to better global QoL scores but only after 12 months. No study reported days in hospital, complications or FFM. DA versus DA plus ONS - 22 RCTs (1286 participants) Most outcomes had low-certainty evidence. There may be little or no effect on mortality after three months, RR 0.92 (95% CI 0.47 to 1.80) or at later time points. At three months advice may lead to fewer hospitalisations, RR 1.70 (95% CI 1.04 to 2.77), but not at up to six months. There may be little or no effect on length of hospital stay at up to three months, MD -1.07 (95% CI -4.10 to 1.97). At three months DA plus ONS may lead to fewer complications, RR 0.75 (95% CI o.56 to 0.99); greater weight gain, MD 1.15 kg (95% CI 0.42 to 1.87); and better global QoL scores, MD 0.33 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.57), but this was not seen at other time points. There was no effect on FFM at three months. DA plus ONS if required versus no advice or ONS - 31 RCTs (3308 participants) Evidence was moderate- to low-certainty. There may be little or no effect on mortality at three months, RR 0.82 (95% CI 0.58 to 1.16) or at later time points. Similarly, little or no effect on hospitalisations at three months, RR 0.83 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.15), at four to six months and up to 12 months; on days in hospital at three months, MD -0.12 (95% CI -2.48 to 2.25) or for complications at any time point. At three months, advice plus ONS probably improve weight, MD 1.25 kg (95% CI 0.73 to 1.76) and may improve FFM, 0.82 (95% CI 0.35 to 1.29), but these effects were not seen later. There may be little or no effect of either intervention on global QoL scores at three months, but advice plus ONS may improve scores at up to 12 months. DA plus ONS versus no advice or ONS - 13 RCTs (1315 participants) Evidence was low- to very low-certainty. There may be little or no effect on mortality after three months, RR 0.91 (95% CI 0.55 to 1.52) or at later time points. No study reported hospitalisations and there may be little or no effect on days in hospital after three months, MD -1.81 (95% CI -3.65 to 0.04) or six months. Advice plus ONS may lead to fewer complications up to three months, MD 0.42 (95% CI 0.20 to 0.89) (one study). Interventions may make little or no difference to weight at three months, MD 1.08 kg (95% CI -0.17 to 2.33); however, advice plus ONS may improve weight at four to six months and up to 12 months. Interventions may make little or no difference in FFM or global QoL scores at any time point. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence of an effect of any intervention on mortality. There may be weight gain with DA and with DA plus ONS in the short term, but the benefits of DA when compared with ONS are uncertain. The size and direction of effect and the length of intervention and follow-up required for benefits to emerge were inconsistent for all other outcomes.  There were too few data for many outcomes to allow meaningful conclusions. Studies focusing on both patient-centred and healthcare outcomes are needed to address the questions in this review.

Oral nutrition supplements and between-meal snacks for nutrition therapy in patients with COPD identified as at nutritional risk: a randomised feasibility trial.

Introduction: Intervention studies have mainly used oral nutritional supplements (ONS) for the management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) identified as at nutritional risk. In this 12-month randomised feasibility trial, we assessed the (1) feasibility of the recruitment, retention and provision of two interventions: ONS and between-meal snacks (snacks) and (2) the potential impact of the provision of snacks and ONS on body weight and quality of life in patients with COPD. Methods: Hospitalised patients with COPD, at nutritional risk, were randomised to ONS (n=19) or snacks (n=15) providing 600 kcal and 22 g protein a day in addition to regular daily diet. The intervention started in hospital and was continued for 12 months after discharge from the hospital. Results: Study recruitment rate was n=34 (45%) and retention rate at 12 months was similar for both groups: n=13 (68%) in the ONS group and n=10 (67%) in the Snacks group. Both groups gained weight from baseline to 12 months (2.3±4.6 kg (p=0.060) in the ONS group and 4.4±6.4 kg (p=0.030) in the Snacks group). The St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score improved from baseline to 12 months in both groups (score 3.9±11.0 (p=0.176) in the ONS group and score 8.9±14.1 (p=0.041) in the Snacks group). Discussion: In patients with COPD who are at nutritional risk snacks are at least as feasible and effective as ONS, however, adequately powered trials that take account of the difficulties in recruiting this patient group are required to confirm this effect.

Supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake in malnourished or nutritionally at-risk adults.

BACKGROUND: Supportive interventions such as serving meals in a dining room environment or the use of assistants to feed patients are frequently recommended for the management of nutritionally vulnerable groups. Such interventions are included in many policy and guideline documents and have implications for staff time but may incur additional costs, yet there appears to be a lack of evidence for their efficacy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake in malnourished or nutritionally at-risk adults. SEARCH METHODS: We identified publications from comprehensive searches of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, British Nursing Index, CINAHL, SCOPUS, ISI Web of Science databases, scrutiny of the reference lists of included trials and related systematic reviews and handsearching the abstracts of relevant meetings. The date of the last search for all databases was 31 March 2013. Additional searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP were undertaken to September 2016. The date of the last search for these databases was 14 September 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of supportive interventions given with the aim of enhancing dietary intake in nutritionally vulnerable adults compared with usual care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors and for the final search, the editor, selected trials from titles and abstracts and independently assessed eligibility of selected trials. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias, as well as evaluating overall quality of the evidence utilising the GRADE instrument, and then agreed as they entered data into the review. The likelihood of clinical heterogeneity amongst trials was judged to be high as trials were in populations with widely different clinical backgrounds, conducted in different healthcare settings and despite some grouping of similar interventions, involved interventions that varied considerably. We were only able, therefore, to conduct meta-analyses for the outcome measures, 'all-cause mortality', 'hospitalisation' and 'nutritional status (weight change)'. MAIN RESULTS: Forty-one trials (10,681 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Trials were grouped according to similar interventions (changes to organisation of nutritional care (N = 13; 3456 participants), changes to the feeding environment (N = 5; 351 participants), modification of meal profile or pattern (N = 12; 649 participants), additional supplementation of meals (N = 10; 6022 participants) and home meal delivery systems (N = 1; 203 participants). Follow-up ranged from 'duration of hospital stay' to 12 months.The overall quality of evidence was moderate to very low, with the majority of trials judged to be at an unclear risk of bias in several risk of bias domains. The risk ratio (RR) for all-cause mortality was 0.78 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 0.92); P = 0.004; 12 trials; 6683 participants; moderate-quality evidence. This translates into 26 (95% CI 9 to 41) fewer cases of death per 1000 participants in favour of supportive interventions. The RR for number of participants with any medical complication ranged from 1.42 in favour of control compared with 0.59 in favour of supportive interventions (very low-quality evidence). Only five trials (4451 participants) investigated health-related quality of life showing no substantial differences between intervention and comparator groups. Information on patient satisfaction was unreliable. The effects of supportive interventions versus comparators on hospitalisation showed a mean difference (MD) of -0.5 days (95% CI -2.6 to 1.6); P = 0.65; 5 trials; 667 participants; very low-quality evidence. Only three of 41 included trials (4108 participants; very low-quality evidence) reported on adverse events, describing intolerance to the supplement (diarrhoea, vomiting; 5/34 participants) and discontinuation of oral nutritional supplements because of refusal or dislike of taste (567/2017 participants). Meta-analysis across 17 trials with adequate data on weight change revealed an overall improvement in weight in favour of supportive interventions versus control: MD 0.6 kg (95% CI 0.21 to 1.02); 2024 participants; moderate-quality evidence. A total of 27 trials investigated nutritional intake with a majority of trials not finding marked differences in energy intake between intervention and comparator groups. Only three trials (1152 participants) reported some data on economic costs but did not use accepted health economic methods (very low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence of moderate to very low quality to suggest that supportive interventions to improve nutritional care results in minimal weight gain. Most of the evidence for the lower risk of all-cause mortality for supportive interventions comes from hospital-based trials and more research is needed to confirm this effect. There is very low-quality evidence regarding adverse effects; therefore whilst some of these interventions are advocated at a national level clinicians should recognise the lack of clear evidence to support their role. This review highlights the importance of assessing patient-important outcomes in future research.

Dietary advice with or without oral nutritional supplements for disease-related malnutrition in adults.

BACKGROUND: Disease-related malnutrition has been reported in 10% to 55% of people in hospital and the community. Dietary advice encouraging the use of energy- and nutrient-rich foods rather than oral nutritional supplements has been suggested as the initial approach for managing disease-related malnutrition. OBJECTIVES: To examine evidence that dietary advice in adults with disease-related malnutrition improves survival, weight and anthropometry; to estimate the size of any additional effect of nutritional supplements combined with dietary advice and to compare the effects of dietary advice with oral nutritional supplements. SEARCH STRATEGY: Relevant publications were identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearching.Last search: 14 February 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of dietary advice with or without oral nutritional supplements in people with disease-related malnutrition in any health-care setting compared with no advice, oral nutritional supplements or dietary advice given alone. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility, risk of bias and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: Forty-five studies (3186 participants) met the inclusion criteria; (dietary advice compared with: no advice (1053 participants); with oral nutritional supplements (332 participants); with dietary advice and oral nutritional supplements (731 participants); and dietary advice plus oral nutritional supplements compared with no additional intervention (1070 participants). Follow-up ranged from 18 days to 24 months. No comparison showed a significant difference between groups for mortality or morbidity. There was a significant change in weight found between groups when comparing dietary advice to no advice for interventions lasting greater than 12 months, mean difference 3.75 kg (95% confidence interval 0.97 to 6.53), and when all studies were combined, mean difference 1.47 kg (95% confidence interval 0.32 to 2.61) although there was significant heterogeneity in the combined analysis (I(2) = 90%). Similar improvements in weight were found for the comparison of dietary advice with nutritional supplements if required versus no advice, mean difference 2.20 kg (95% confidence interval 1.16 to 3.25). Dietary advice compared with no advice was also associated with significantly improved mid-arm muscle circumference when all studies were combined, but with moderate heterogeneity, mean difference 0.81 mm (95% confidence interval 0.31 to 1.31). Dietary advice given with nutritional supplements compared with dietary advice alone resulted in improvements in: mid-arm muscle circumference, mean difference -0.89 mm (95% confidence interval -1.35 to -0.43); triceps skinfold thickness, mean difference -1.22 mm (95% confidence interval -2.34 to -0.09); and grip strength, mean difference -1.67 kg (95% confidence interval -2.96 to -0.37), although the effects on triceps skinfold thickness and grip strength were heterogeneous. Dietary advice with supplements if required resulted in a significant increase in triceps skinfold thickness compared with no advice, mean difference 0.40 mm (95% confidence interval 0.10 to 0.70), although these results are from a single trial with only 29 participants. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence of variable quality suggests that dietary advice with or without oral nutritional supplements may improve weight, body composition and grip strength. We found no evidence of benefit of dietary advice or oral nutritional supplements given alone or in combination on survival. Studies addressing the impact of nutritional interventions on nutritional, functional and patient-centred outcomes are needed.