Peter Sommerville1, Alex Lang2, Sally Archer3, Thomas Woodcock4, Jonathan Birns1. 1. Department of Geriatric Medicine, Guy's and St. Thomas's Hospital, UK. 2. Department of Dietetics, Guy's and St. Thomas's Hospital, UK. 3. Department of Speech And Language Therapy, Guy's and St. Thomas's Hospital, UK. 4. Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: care of patients with a permanently unsafe swallow who are inappropriate for tube feeding is challenging. Eating and drinking with acknowledged risk (EDAR) may be an appropriate strategy but without clear decision making and communication patients may spend unnecessarily long 'nil by mouth' (NBM), they or their family may experience significant anxieties and advance care plans may not be made. METHODS: the FORWARD (Feeding via the Oral Route With Acknowledged Risk of Deterioration) care bundle was sequentially co-designed and embedded across different in-patient clinical services using 'plan-do-study-act' methodology to systematise best practice. Care before and after FORWARD's implementation was evaluated using a time-series analysis of 305 'EDAR patients' (19 in 6 months pre-FORWARD; 42 in a 12-month 'pilot'; 244 patients in the subsequent 27 months). RESULTS: median (IQR) days patients were NBM without an alternative feeding route reduced significantly from 2 (1-4) pre-FORWARD to 0 (0-2) in the 'pilot' and 0 (0) post-'pilot' (P < 0.05). G-chart analysis demonstrated sustained performance across time and different clinical settings. Implementation of FORWARD significantly improved documentation of capacity assessment (42%→98%), discussions with next of kin (47%→98%) and onward communication of feeding plans (67%→81%). In wards where FORWARD was introduced, rate of aspiration pneumonia (a 'balancing measure' sensitive to harm associated with EDAR) increased at half the rate of dysphagia (0.8%/year versus 1.6%/year). CONCLUSION: the FORWARD care bundle supported complex decision-making around EDAR in patients with persistent dysphagia. The benefits of FORWARD were shown to be sustained over time and in a wide in-patient context.
BACKGROUND: care of patients with a permanently unsafe swallow who are inappropriate for tube feeding is challenging. Eating and drinking with acknowledged risk (EDAR) may be an appropriate strategy but without clear decision making and communication patients may spend unnecessarily long 'nil by mouth' (NBM), they or their family may experience significant anxieties and advance care plans may not be made. METHODS: the FORWARD (Feeding via the Oral Route With Acknowledged Risk of Deterioration) care bundle was sequentially co-designed and embedded across different in-patient clinical services using 'plan-do-study-act' methodology to systematise best practice. Care before and after FORWARD's implementation was evaluated using a time-series analysis of 305 'EDAR patients' (19 in 6 months pre-FORWARD; 42 in a 12-month 'pilot'; 244 patients in the subsequent 27 months). RESULTS: median (IQR) days patients were NBM without an alternative feeding route reduced significantly from 2 (1-4) pre-FORWARD to 0 (0-2) in the 'pilot' and 0 (0) post-'pilot' (P < 0.05). G-chart analysis demonstrated sustained performance across time and different clinical settings. Implementation of FORWARD significantly improved documentation of capacity assessment (42%→98%), discussions with next of kin (47%→98%) and onward communication of feeding plans (67%→81%). In wards where FORWARD was introduced, rate of aspiration pneumonia (a 'balancing measure' sensitive to harm associated with EDAR) increased at half the rate of dysphagia (0.8%/year versus 1.6%/year). CONCLUSION: the FORWARD care bundle supported complex decision-making around EDAR in patients with persistent dysphagia. The benefits of FORWARD were shown to be sustained over time and in a wide in-patient context.