BACKGROUND: Recent clinical studies have shown that nasogastric tube feeding is safe in the majority of patients with acute pancreatitis. Patient-reported outcomes are important, but the impact of nasogastric tube feeding on the quality of life has not been investigated. This study aims to compare quality of life between nasogastric tube feeding and nil-by-mouth groups during and after hospitalization. METHODS: Patient-reported outcomes were recorded daily in a patient diary during hospitalization. The Abdominal Surgery Impact Scale questionnaire was used to determine patients' quality of life. The patients were then followed up at 1 week and 1, 3, and 6 months after discharge. RESULTS: While 17 patients were randomized to nasogastric tube feeding, 18 were put on nil-by-mouth. The overall quality of life and individual domains did not differ significantly between the groups during hospitalization (P = .500) or follow-up. For the entire cohort, individual quality-of-life domains during hospitalization improved significantly, including functional impairment (P < .001), pain (P < .001), sleep (P = .035), and psychological function (P < .001). Quality of life further improved for all patients from time of hospital discharge to 3 (P = .002) and 6 months follow-up (P < .001) but not to 1 week and 1 month. CONCLUSIONS: The use of nasogastric tube feeding, in comparison with nil-by-mouth, does not impair patients' quality of life. Given the clinical benefits of nasogastric tube feeding, nasogastric feeding should be considered the first-line approach in all acute pancreatitis patients requiring enteral nutrition.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Recent clinical studies have shown that nasogastric tube feeding is safe in the majority of patients with acute pancreatitis. Patient-reported outcomes are important, but the impact of nasogastric tube feeding on the quality of life has not been investigated. This study aims to compare quality of life between nasogastric tube feeding and nil-by-mouth groups during and after hospitalization. METHODS:Patient-reported outcomes were recorded daily in a patient diary during hospitalization. The Abdominal Surgery Impact Scale questionnaire was used to determine patients' quality of life. The patients were then followed up at 1 week and 1, 3, and 6 months after discharge. RESULTS: While 17 patients were randomized to nasogastric tube feeding, 18 were put on nil-by-mouth. The overall quality of life and individual domains did not differ significantly between the groups during hospitalization (P = .500) or follow-up. For the entire cohort, individual quality-of-life domains during hospitalization improved significantly, including functional impairment (P < .001), pain (P < .001), sleep (P = .035), and psychological function (P < .001). Quality of life further improved for all patients from time of hospital discharge to 3 (P = .002) and 6 months follow-up (P < .001) but not to 1 week and 1 month. CONCLUSIONS: The use of nasogastric tube feeding, in comparison with nil-by-mouth, does not impair patients' quality of life. Given the clinical benefits of nasogastric tube feeding, nasogastric feeding should be considered the first-line approach in all acute pancreatitispatients requiring enteral nutrition.