Literature DB >> 12090690

Enteral versus parenteral nutrition: the patient's preference.

James S Scolapio1, Michael F Picco, Vilia B Tarrosa.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Given that, in most clinical circumstances, enteral nutrition (nasal gastric tube feeding) may not necessarily be superior to parenteral nutrition (IV feeding), consideration of patient preference should be included in decisions on the method of feeding.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate patient preference for nasal gastric versus IV feeding.
METHODS: We administered a written questionnaire to 101 hospitalized oncology patients and 98 outpatients without gastrointestinal illness (controls). Statistical analyses included comparisons of group means with Student t tests, comparisons of proportions with chi2 tests, and logistic regression analysis.
RESULTS: Demographic variables of the 2 groups were comparable. In both groups, most individuals preferred IV to tube feeding. Preference for IV or tube feeding was related to patient perception of the comfort of these interventions. In logistic regression analyses, the strongest influences on preference were age and perceived comfort of IV feeding. Older individuals preferred IV to tube feeding. Gender, education level, physician's recommendation, and cost did not influence patient preference.
CONCLUSIONS: Most patients prefer IV to nasal gastric feeding. Awareness of this patient preference is helpful in making decisions regarding the method of nutrient delivery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12090690     DOI: 10.1177/0148607102026004248

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr        ISSN: 0148-6071            Impact factor:   4.016


  6 in total

Review 1.  Malnutrition and cachexia in patients with head and neck cancer treated with (chemo)radiotherapy.

Authors:  Mojca Gorenc; Nada Rotovnik Kozjek; Primož Strojan
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2015-03-29

Review 2.  Nutrition in Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Paula Ravasco
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2019-08-14       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 3.  Managing Cachexia in Head and Neck Cancer: a Systematic Scoping Review.

Authors:  Antti A Mäkitie; Rasheed Omobolaji Alabi; Helena Orell; Omar Youssef; Alhadi Almangush; Akihiro Homma; Robert P Takes; Fernando López; Remco de Bree; Juan P Rodrigo; Alfio Ferlito
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2022-02-27       Impact factor: 3.845

Review 4.  Supplemental parenteral nutrition in cancer care: why, who, when.

Authors:  Paolo Cotogni; Federico Bozzetti; François Goldwasser; Paula Jimenez-Fonseca; Sine Roelsgaard Obling; Juan W Valle
Journal:  Ther Adv Med Oncol       Date:  2022-09-26       Impact factor: 5.485

Review 5.  Understanding Cachexia in Head and Neck Cancer.

Authors:  Sivaramakrishnan Muthanandam; Jananni Muthu
Journal:  Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs       Date:  2021-08-27

6.  A European survey on the practice of nutritional interventions in head-neck cancer patients undergoing curative treatment with radio(chemo)therapy.

Authors:  Federico Bozzetti; Cristina Gurizzan; Simon Lal; Andre' Van Gossum; Geert Wanten; Wojciech Golusinski; Sefik Hosal; Paolo Bossi
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2021-06-19       Impact factor: 2.503

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.