Theresa A Fessler1,2, Timothy B Short3, Kate F Willcutts4, Robert G Sawyer5. 1. Department of Nutrition Services, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA, 22903, USA. taf4c@virginia.edu. 2. Morrison Healthcare, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA, 22903, USA. taf4c@virginia.edu. 3. Department of Palliative Care, University of Virginia Heath System, Charlottesville, VA, 22903, USA. 4. Department of Nutrition Services, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA, 22903, USA. 5. Department of Surgery, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI, 49008, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopically placed gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are useful for long-term enteral nutrition; however, they are associated with lack of benefit for patients with advanced dementia, at end of life, and for some stroke patients with early regain of swallowing function. We surveyed physician opinions on decision making with the aim to identify factors that can lead to inappropriate PEG placement, as a first step of a quality improvement initiative to prevent inappropriate PEG placements at our facility. METHODS: A survey was distributed to 231 physicians, with questions about discussion topics, contraindications, responsibilities, and practices in decision making for PEG placement. Five-point Likert scales were used for most responses. RESULTS: Of 62 respondents, the majority were general surgeons (51.6%) and neurologists (30.6%). Levels of agreement were very low that PEG placement is contraindicated in advanced dementia (> 56% disagreed) and at end of life (55% disagreed) with scores of 2.4 and 2.5 (out of 5), respectively. Agreement level was low (score of 2.85) for delaying PEG for stroke patients by at least 2 weeks. Agreement was high for the discussion topics, for allowing 1-7 days for processing information, and for consulting the nutrition service. Over 98% of respondents chose primary team and 58% chose both primary and endoscopy teams as being responsible for discussions with patients and care partners in the decision-making process. CONCLUSIONS: Greater awareness is needed of the lack of benefit of PEG feeding in advanced dementia, at end of life, and for some stroke patients with early regain of swallow function. Disagreement exists as to whether the primary team and endoscopist share in the responsibility for discussions in decision making for PEG placement.
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopically placed gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are useful for long-term enteral nutrition; however, they are associated with lack of benefit for patients with advanced dementia, at end of life, and for some strokepatients with early regain of swallowing function. We surveyed physician opinions on decision making with the aim to identify factors that can lead to inappropriate PEG placement, as a first step of a quality improvement initiative to prevent inappropriate PEG placements at our facility. METHODS: A survey was distributed to 231 physicians, with questions about discussion topics, contraindications, responsibilities, and practices in decision making for PEG placement. Five-point Likert scales were used for most responses. RESULTS: Of 62 respondents, the majority were general surgeons (51.6%) and neurologists (30.6%). Levels of agreement were very low that PEG placement is contraindicated in advanced dementia (> 56% disagreed) and at end of life (55% disagreed) with scores of 2.4 and 2.5 (out of 5), respectively. Agreement level was low (score of 2.85) for delaying PEG for strokepatients by at least 2 weeks. Agreement was high for the discussion topics, for allowing 1-7 days for processing information, and for consulting the nutrition service. Over 98% of respondents chose primary team and 58% chose both primary and endoscopy teams as being responsible for discussions with patients and care partners in the decision-making process. CONCLUSIONS: Greater awareness is needed of the lack of benefit of PEG feeding in advanced dementia, at end of life, and for some strokepatients with early regain of swallow function. Disagreement exists as to whether the primary team and endoscopist share in the responsibility for discussions in decision making for PEG placement.
Entities:
Keywords:
Advanced dementia; Decision making; End of life; Enteral nutrition; Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG); Stroke
Authors: Hilde M Buiting; Josephine M Clayton; Phyllis N Butow; Johannes Jm van Delden; Agnes van der Heide Journal: Palliat Med Date: 2010-09-24 Impact factor: 4.762
Authors: Joan Teno; David O Meltzer; Susan L Mitchell; Ana T Fulton; Pedro Gozalo; Vincent Mor Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: L C Skitt; J J Hurley; J K Turner; A J Green; N Pinch; S Dolwani; G L Swift; T Green Journal: Clin Med (Lond) Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 2.659
Authors: Edward C Jauch; Jeffrey L Saver; Harold P Adams; Askiel Bruno; J J Buddy Connors; Bart M Demaerschalk; Pooja Khatri; Paul W McMullan; Adnan I Qureshi; Kenneth Rosenfield; Phillip A Scott; Debbie R Summers; David Z Wang; Max Wintermark; Howard Yonas Journal: Stroke Date: 2013-01-31 Impact factor: 7.914