ABSTRACT
Background and Aims Though adequate nutrition following critical illness is fundamental to rehabilitation, it is poorly provided. To inform interventions to improve nutrition support for patients discharged from an intensive care unit (ICU), we aimed to document remediable problems in nutrition management on general hospital wards, and the context for these problems.
Methods This work forms part of a larger mixed methods study: REcovery FoLlowing intensivE Care Treatment (REFLECT). From three NHS hospitals, chosen to represent different hospital settings, we conducted in-depth reviews of 20 cases where in-hospital death after ICU discharge was judged ‘probably avoidable’ and 20 cases where patients survived to hospital discharge. We interviewed 55 patients, family members and staff about their experiences of post-ICU ward care. From these primary data we extracted information related to nutrition provision to develop a process map of how enteral feeding is delivered to patients on hospital wards after ICU discharge.
Results Problems with nutrition delivery were common (81 problems in 20/40 cases), mostly (70/81) in patients whose death was judged “probably avoidable”. Common issues included failure to monitor nutritional intake, delays in dietician/nutritional support referrals, removal of enteral feeding tubes before oral intake was established, and poor management of enteral nutrition delivery. Staff identified workload related to the high care needs of post-ICU patients as contributing to these problems in nutrition delivery. The process map of enteral feeding delivery demonstrated that local policy for tube placement confirmation risked prolonged system-related delays to administering naso-gastric feed, significantly affecting the volume of feed delivered to patients.
Conclusions Using a novel mixed methods approach, we identified problems throughout the process of delivering nutritional support, which had profound consequences for post-ICU patients. We demonstrated the importance of multi-professional collaboration in delivering enteral nutrition. Improving collaborative working processes within the ward system may ensure timely confirmation of correct nasogastric tube placement, and support safe feeding. Addressing the common problems in post-ICU nutritional support we identified may support improved nutritional delivery and potentially enhance recovery from critical illness.
Study registration ISRCTN:14658054
Competing Interest Statement
PW was Chief Medical Officer for Sensyne Health until March 2020, and has shares in the company. No other authors declare any conflicts of interest.
Funding Statement
This paper presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Research for Patient Benefit (RfPB) Programme (Grant Reference Number PB-PG-0215-36149). This research was also supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics committee of Wales Research Ethics Comittee 4 gave ethical approval for this work (reference 17/WA/0139).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
