3.8 Article

Exclusive enteral nutrition in children with inflammatory bowel disease: Physician perspectives and practice

期刊

JGH OPEN
卷 3, 期 2, 页码 148-153

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jgh3.12121

关键词

Crohn's disease; enteral nutrition; gastroenterologist; pediatrics; surveys and questionnaires

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Aim: Exclusive enteral nutrition (EEN) is recognized internationally as the first line of treatment for children with active Crohn's disease (CD). A survey conducted a decade ago demonstrated that 40% of Australian pediatric gastroenterologists did not think EEN to be an appropriate treatment for CD. This study aimed to explore the current attitudes of Australian and New Zealand (NZ) pediatric gastroenterologists toward the use of EEN in children with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Methods: All practicing pediatric gastroenterologists in Australia and NZ were invited via an existing email network to complete an anonymous online questionnaire. Results: The questionnaire was completed by 37 respondents (54% response rate), 31 from Australia and 6 from NZ. All respondents felt that EEN definitely or probably has a role in inducing remission for children with newly diagnosed CD. Australian gastroenterologists were more likely to use EEN for relapsed CD or IBD-unclassified than NZ doctors (P < 0.05). Adherence was reported to be the greatest disadvantage of EEN. Dietitians were believed to play the most crucial role in EEN administration. Variations in EEN protocols included the use of flavorings or fluids during EEN and different patterns of food reintroduction. Conclusions: These Australia and NZ pediatric gastroenterologists felt that EEN plays an important role in the induction of remission in children with newly diagnosed CD. However, the perceived role of EEN use in other types of IBD varied. EEN protocols varied widely between centers. Attitudes toward the roles of EEN have altered greatly across Australasia over the last decade.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据