4.2 Article

Comparison of Syringe Compression Force Between ENFit and Legacy Feeding Tubes

期刊

JOURNAL OF PARENTERAL AND ENTERAL NUTRITION
卷 43, 期 1, 页码 107-117

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jpen.1174

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences [UL1 TR000135]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Since initial report in 1972, misconnections continue to be an issue, especially in hospitalized patients with multiple access devices. A new small-bore connector standard (ENFit) has been proposed in order to minimize misconnections. Methods: Commercially available finalized ENFit tubes of a variety of sizes (14 French [Fr] size, 18Fr, 20Fr, 24Fr, and low-profile) were obtained for current testing. Variety of commercially available formulas including blenderized tube feeding (BTF) products (Jevity 1 Cal, Abbott Nutrition, Abbott Park, IL; Nourish, Functional Formularies, Centerville, OH; Real Food Blends, Chesterton, IN) were tested. Results: Data from individual measurements were aggregated for ENFit and legacy tubes and revealed higher syringe compression force in legacy tubes compared with ENFit tubes for 20Fr size with Jevity formula. Our institution's BTF formula revealed that legacy tubes had lower syringe compression force than ENFit tubes for 14Fr tube size. Remaining measurements revealed no significant difference. Model 1 of regression analysis revealed that only formula and tube size were significant with R-2 of 0.63. Model 2 evaluating the impact of tube size, blender, time of blending, and legacy vs ENFit revealed that tube size, blender used, and blending time were significant with legacy vs ENFit being nonsignificant (R-2 of 0.72). Conclusions: Overall, only a small number of tube sizes (14Fr and 20Fr) with selected formulas revealed a significant difference between ENFit and Legacy tubes, with remaining studies finding no significant difference. Regression analysis revealed that variables such as formula, size of tube, blender used, and time of blending may have more impact on compression force.

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

4.2
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