Enfermeria clinica · 2023
Clinical and functional assessment in patients admitted with pluripathological dysphagia according to the mode of feeding: Through a gastrostomy tube or oral.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
López-Muñoz Cristina, Aranda-Gallardo Marta, Rivas-Ruiz Francisco, Moya-Suárez Ana Belén, Morales-Asencio José Miguel, Canca-Sanchez José Carlos
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Multipathological patients are a vulnerable population with high comorbidity, functional impairment, and nutritional risk. Almost 50% of these hospitalized patients have dysphagia. There is no consensus on whether placement of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube provides greater clinical benefit. The purpose of this study was to know and compare 2 groups of multipathological patients with dysphagia according to the mode of feeding: PEG vs. oral.
METHOD: Retrospective descriptive study with hospitalized patients (2016-19), pluripathological, with dysphagia, nutritional risk, over 50 years with diagnoses of: dementia, cerebrovascular accident (CVA), neurological disease, or oropharyngeal neoplasia. Terminally ill patients with jejunostomy tube or parenteral nutrition were excluded. Sociodemographic variables, clinical situation, and comorbidities were evaluated. Bivariate analysis was performed to compare both groups according to their diet, establishing a significance level of p < .05.
RESULTS: 1928 multipathological patients. The PEG group consisted of 84 patients (n122). A total of 84 were randomly selected to form the non-PEG group (n434). This group had less history of bronchoaspiration/pneumonia (p = .008), its main diagnosis was stroke versus dementia in the PEG group (p < .001). Both groups had more than a 45% risk of comorbidity (p = .77).
CONCLUSIONS: multipathological patients with dysphagia with PEG usually have dementia as their main diagnosis, however, stroke is the most relevant pathology in those fed orally. Both groups have associated risk factors, high comorbidity, and dependence. This causes their vital prognosis to be limited regardless of the mode of feeding.
METHOD: Retrospective descriptive study with hospitalized patients (2016-19), pluripathological, with dysphagia, nutritional risk, over 50 years with diagnoses of: dementia, cerebrovascular accident (CVA), neurological disease, or oropharyngeal neoplasia. Terminally ill patients with jejunostomy tube or parenteral nutrition were excluded. Sociodemographic variables, clinical situation, and comorbidities were evaluated. Bivariate analysis was performed to compare both groups according to their diet, establishing a significance level of p < .05.
RESULTS: 1928 multipathological patients. The PEG group consisted of 84 patients (n122). A total of 84 were randomly selected to form the non-PEG group (n434). This group had less history of bronchoaspiration/pneumonia (p = .008), its main diagnosis was stroke versus dementia in the PEG group (p < .001). Both groups had more than a 45% risk of comorbidity (p = .77).
CONCLUSIONS: multipathological patients with dysphagia with PEG usually have dementia as their main diagnosis, however, stroke is the most relevant pathology in those fed orally. Both groups have associated risk factors, high comorbidity, and dependence. This causes their vital prognosis to be limited regardless of the mode of feeding.