4.7 Article

Current practices in feeding tube placement for US acute ischemic stroke inpatients

Journal

NEUROLOGY
Volume 83, Issue 10, Pages 874-882

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000000764

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective:We sought to identify current US hospital practices for feeding tube placement in ischemic stroke.Methods:In a retrospective observational study, we examined the frequency of feeding tube placement among hospitals in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample with 30 adult ischemic stroke admissions annually with length of stay greater than 3 days. We examined trends from 2004 to 2011 and predictors using data from more recent years (2008-2011). We used multilevel multivariable regression models accounting for a hospital random effect, adjusted for patient-level and hospital-level factors to predict feeding tube placement.Results:Feeding tube insertion rates did not change from 2004 to 2011 (8.1 vs 8.4 per 100 admissions; p trend = 0.11). Among 1,540 hospitals with 164,408 stroke hospitalizations from 2008 to 2011, a feeding tube was placed 8.8% of the time (n = 14,480). Variation in the rate of feeding tube placement was high, from 0% to 26% between hospitals (interquartile range 4.8%-11.2%). In the subset with available race/ethnicity data (n = 88,385), after controlling for patient demographics, socioeconomics, and comorbidities, hospital factors associated with feeding tube placement included stroke volume (odds ratio [OR] 1.28 highest vs lowest quartile; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-1.49), for-profit status (OR 1.13 vs nonprofit; 95% CI 1.01-1.25), and intubation use (OR 1.66 highest vs lowest quartile; 95% CI 1.47-1.87). In addition, hospitals with higher rates of black/Hispanic stroke admissions had increased risk of feeding tube placement (OR 1.28 highest vs lowest quartile; 95% CI 1.14-1.44).Conclusions:Variation in feeding tube insertion rates across hospitals is large. Differences across hospitals may be partly explained by external factors beyond the patient-centered decision to insert a feeding tube.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available