Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Contents:

Information:

  • Access

Actions:

      • Send article to Kindle

        To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

        Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

        Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

        A survey of enterally tube fed patients receiving low energy tube feeding regimens
        Available formats
        ×

        Send article to Dropbox

        To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

        A survey of enterally tube fed patients receiving low energy tube feeding regimens
        Available formats
        ×

        Send article to Google Drive

        To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

        A survey of enterally tube fed patients receiving low energy tube feeding regimens
        Available formats
        ×
Export citation

The British Artificial Nutrition Survey suggests that patients receiving long-term tube feeding are an increasingly dependent population with low activity levels(1). It has been suggested that such patients may have lower energy requirements than predicted and need low energy tube feeding regimens in order to prevent weight gain(2). However, there is little published information about the use of low energy tube feeding regimens in the UK. Therefore, a preliminary survey was undertaken to investigate and characterise the numbers and types of patients receiving low energy tube feeding regimens (⩽5020.8 kJ/d (⩽1200 kcal/d)) and to understand the reasons for their use.

A survey of adult tube fed patients (≥18 years) who were receiving a low energy tube feeding regimen (receiving ⩽5020.8 kJ/d (⩽1200 kcal/d)) was undertaken in patients receiving enteral tube feeding at home (HETF) (n 1400) or in a long term neuro-rehabilitation centre (n 108) between July and September 2009. A standardised questionnaire, which included patient demographics (age, location, dependency and activity levels), tube type and feeding regimen details (duration, timing, energy and volume prescription), dietary intake and reasons for low energy tube feeding, was completed for each patient from their dietetic notes. Estimated energy requirements were calculated from the information provided using the Schofield equation(3).

Sixteen percent (239/1508) of patients were receiving a low energy tube feeding regimen. Patients on low calorie tube feeding regimens had a mean age of 60 years (range 18–97), the majority were female (77%), with an average weight of 63.1 kg (SD 12) and BMI of 24 kg/m2 (SD 3.5). Patients' main diagnoses were cerebro-vascular accident (33%) or other diseases of the central nervous system (18%), multiple sclerosis (13%), cerebral palsy (6%) and learning difficulties (6%). Average duration of enteral feeding was 5 years (SD 4.3, range 1 week – 22 years). Patients were predominantly PEG fed (74%), via boluses (20%) or continuous/intermittent pump feeding (80%). Patients were primarily living in nursing homes (71%), were highly dependent (85%) and had very low activity levels (98%). The majority (87%) of patients received feed via their tube as the sole source of nutrition using a 5020.8 kJ (1200 kcal) (50%) or 4184 kJ (1000 kcal) (39%) nutritionally complete feed. Their mean daily energy intake was 4527.088 kJ/d (1082 kcal/d) (SD 135), significantly lower than the calculated mean energy requirement (6932.888 kJ/d (1657 kcal/d) (SD 257), P=0.0001). The main recorded reasons for use of low energy tube feeding regimens were long-term weight gain and decreased mobility. In the remainder of patients (n 31) the tube feed provided ~74% of total energy, with additional energy provided by other sources (food: n 17, sip feed: n 13, nothing: n 1).

The data from this preliminary survey suggest that a significant proportion (16%) of enterally tube fed patients receive a low energy tube feeding regimen (⩽5020.8 kJ/d (⩽1200 kcal/d)), which in the majority of cases is a sole source of nutrition. Further research is required in a larger cohort to fully understand the energy intakes and requirements of patients on long term tube feeding regimens, the reasons for use of low energy tube feeding regimens and their impact on patient outcome.

With thanks to the Dietetic Department at Nottingham University Hospitals.

1.British Artificial Nutrition Survey (BANS) (2009) BAPEN.
2.Dickerson, RN, Brown, RO, Gervasio, JG et al. (1999) J Am Coll Nutr 18, 6168.
3.PEN Group (2004) The British Dietetic Association.