Literature DB >> 12577946

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: adequacy and quality of information given to decision makers.

S D Ladas1, K Triantafyllou, I Liappas, M Hatziargyriou, E Tzavellas, C Barbatzas, G Christodoulou, S A Raptis.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Nowadays percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is widely available, but patient-selection criteria and quality of informed consent are debated. The aims of this retrospective study were to evaluate the quality of information given to the decision-makers (relatives) and determine the overall acceptance of the procedure by the patients' family.
METHODS: The relatives of patients with PEG were interviewed by telephone, using a structured questionnaire. They (n = 55; 36% spouses, 34% children, 30% other) gave information about themselves and the patient (34 males, 21 females, median age 69, range 16-92 years) who underwent PEG tube placement for eating disorders or dysphagia.
RESULTS: At the time of evaluation 30/55 (54.6%) patients had died. The cumulative median survival was significantly longer in patients younger than 75 years by 58 days (p = 0.009). Relatives believed that PEG could improve the patients' quality of life (56%) or/and the underlying disease. Although 93% of the decision-makers considered that their opinion had been taken into account when the procedure was done, 25% said that they had not adequately been informed about alternative methods and the complications of the procedure (38%). 54% said that the procedure had improved the quality of life of the family. Most of the decision-makers believed that their decision was correct (87%) and they would recommend PEG (84%) to other patients suffering from dysphagia.
CONCLUSION: Though several decision-makers were not satisfied with the quality of information given before informed consent, the overall acceptance of the PEG placement for nutritional support is high. Copyright 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12577946     DOI: 10.1159/000067667

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Dis        ISSN: 0257-2753            Impact factor:   2.404


  11 in total

1.  Informed consent for digestive endoscopy.

Authors:  Marcela Kopacova; Jan Bures
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2012-06-16

2.  Indications, complications and long-term follow-up of patients undergoing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: A retrospective study.

Authors:  Fatih Ermis; Melih Ozel; Kemal Oncu; Yusuf Yazgan; Levent Demirturk; Ahmet Kemal Gurbuz; Taner Akyol; Hasan Nazik
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2012-03-05       Impact factor: 1.704

3.  Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): cui bono?

Authors:  Seamus O'Mahony
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-10-16

Review 4.  Ethics and gastrointestinal artificial feeding.

Authors:  Timothy O Lipman
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2004-08

Review 5.  Difficulties with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): a practical guide for the endoscopist.

Authors:  S O'Mahony
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2012-08-21       Impact factor: 1.568

6.  Hospital and long-term outcome after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy.

Authors:  Brian M Smith; Paul Perring; Milo Engoren; Joseph J Sferra
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-04-28       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Acceptability and outcomes of the Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement--patients' and care givers' perspectives.

Authors:  Muhammad K Anis; Shahab Abid; Wasim Jafri; Zaigham Abbas; Hasnain A Shah; Saeed Hamid; Rozina Wasaya
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-11-24       Impact factor: 3.067

8.  Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: Patients' outcomes, adequacy and quality of information given to decision-makers and procedure acceptance.

Authors:  Petros Stathopoulos; George Karamanolis; Ioannis S Papanikolaou; Dimitrios Polymeros; Angelos A Papadopoulos; Konstantinos Triantafyllou
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol       Date:  2011

9.  Special considerations for endoscopists on PEG indications in older patients.

Authors:  Fabrizio Cardin
Journal:  ISRN Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-11-25

Review 10.  How are treatment decisions made about artificial nutrition for individuals at risk of lacking capacity? A systematic literature review.

Authors:  Gemma Clarke; Katy Harrison; Anthony Holland; Isla Kuhn; Stephen Barclay
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-04-16       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.