Trends in the use of feeding tubes in North Carolina hospitals 1989 to 2000
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
OBJECTIVE: National data describing the placement of feeding tubes demonstrated a rapid increase in use in the early and mid-1990s. In the past several years, substantial concerns have arisen regarding the appropriateness of the procedure in many chronically ill patients. The purpose of this study is to determine whether the use of feeding tubes has continued to increase through the 1990s despite these widely publicized concerns.
DESIGN: Repeated measure cross-sectional study of the North Carolina Discharge Database.
SETTING: Analyses of all nonfederal hospital inpatient admissions in North Carolina.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We examined the absolute numbers and rates of feeding tube placements from 1989 to 2000. The rate of feeding tube placement increased from 59/100,000 persons in 1989 to 94/100,000 persons in 2000, an overall 60% increase with slowing in the rate of increase in the late 1990s. However, when outpatient procedures were included, the increase in tube feeding continued throughout the 11-year period of observation. The increase was due to an increase in utilization within all hospitals over the time period. Utilization did not differ between profit and not for profit hospitals. The relative growth rate of inpatient feeding tube placement did not differ by age group but the absolute increase was greatest in those age 75 years and over.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that the use of feeding tubes has continued to increase through the 1990s. This increase occurred despite ongoing controversy in the medical literature about feeding tube placement in chronically ill patients.
- Grant MD, Rudberg MA, Brody JA. Gastrostomy placement and mortality among hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries. JAMA. 1998;279:1973–6. CrossRef
- Sullivan RJ Jr. Accepting death without artificial nutrition or hydration. J Gen Intern Med. 1993;8:220–4. CrossRef
- Finucane TE, Christmas C, Travis K. Tube feeding in patients with advanced dementia: a review of the evidence. JAMA. 1999;282:1365–70. CrossRef
- Rabeneck L, Wray NP, Petersen NJ. Long-term outcomes of patients receiving percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes. J Gen Intern Med. 1996;11:287–93. CrossRef
- Taylor CA, Larson DE, Ballard DJ, et al. Predictors of outcome after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a community-based study. Mayo Clin Proc. 1992;67:1042–9.
- Wolfsen HC, Kozarek RA, Ball TJ, Patterson DJ, Botoman VA, Ryan JA. Long-term survival in patients undergoing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and jejunostomy. Am J Gastroenterol. 1990;85:1120–2.
- Kaw M, Sekas G. Long-term follow-up of consequences of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes in nursing home patients. Dig Dis Sci. 1994;39:738–43. CrossRef
- Fisman DN, Levy AR, Gifford DR, Tamblyn R. Survival after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy among older residents of Quebec. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1999;47:349–53.
- Sanders DS, Carter MJ, D’Silva J, James G, Bolton RP, Bardhan KD. Survival analysis in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy feeding: a worse outcome in patients with dementia. Am J Gastroenterol. 2000;95:1472–5. CrossRef
- Loser C, Wolters S, Folsch UR. Enteral long-term nutrition via percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in 210 patients: a four-year prospective study. Dig Dis Sci. 1998;43:2549–57. CrossRef
- Finocchiaro C, Galletti R, Rovera G, et al. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a long-term follow-up. Nutrition. 1997;13:520–3. CrossRef
- Rabeneck L, McCullough LB, Wray NP. Ethically justified, clinically comprehensive guidelines for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement. Lancet. 1997;349:496–8. CrossRef
- Light VL, Slezak FA, Porter JA, Gerson LW, McCord G. Predictive factors for early mortality after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Gastrointest Endosc. 1995;42:330–5. CrossRef
- Finucane TE, Christmas C. More caution about tube feeding. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000;48:1167–8.
- Steinbrook R, Lo B. Artificial feeding—solid ground, not a slippery slope. N Engl J Med. 1988;318:286–90. CrossRef
- Callahan CM, Haag KM, Buchanan NN, Nisi R. Decision-making for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy among older adults in a community setting. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1999;47:1105–9.
- Solomon MZ, O’Donnell L, Jennings B, et al. Decisions near the end of life: professional views on life-sustaining treatments. Am J Public Health. 1993;83:14–23.
- Brett AS, Rosenberg JC. The adequacy of informed consent for placement of gastrostomy tubes. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:745–8. CrossRef
- Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris DR, Coffey RM. Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care. 1998;36:8–27. CrossRef
- Dixon AS. The evolution of clinical policies. Med Care. 1990;28:201–20. CrossRef
- Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations. 4th ed. New York, NY: The Free Press; 1995.
- Duffy SQ, Farley DE. The protracted demise of medical technology. The case of intermittent positive pressure breathing. Med Care. 1992;30:718–36. CrossRef
- Trends in the use of feeding tubes in North Carolina hospitals 1989 to 2000
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Volume 19, Issue 10 , pp 1034-1038
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Additional Links
- tube feeding
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 5039 Old Clinic Building 229, CB#7110, 27599-7110, Chapel Hill, NC
- 2. Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
- 3. Department of Economics, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC
- 4. the Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC