Prospective implementation of algorithmic patient selection for gastrostomy tube placement consultations: a pre- and post-intervention analysis
Received 5 December 2018
Accepted for publication 13 April 2019
Published 30 May 2019 Volume 2019:12 Pages 231—237
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Anastasios Koulaouzidis
Joseph J Cano,1 Aaron P Thrift,2,3 Hashem B El-Serag1,4
1Section of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA; 2Section of Epidemiology and Population Sciences, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA; 3Dan L Duncan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA; 4Department of Medicine, Houston VA HSR&D Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, TX, USA
Background: Studies have shown high but variable mortality following gastrostomy tube (GT) placement. There are no standard practice guidelines for GT placement.
Aim: To evaluate if implementation of patient selection and prognosis algorithms for GT insertion has favorable effects on patient outcomes.
Methods: This was a pre-, post-cohort analysis in a Veterans Affairs hospital. We implemented a patient selection algorithm aided by the Sheffield Gastrostomy Scoring System (SGSS) in July 2015. We reviewed all referrals to the inpatient service for a GT between July 2014 and June 2016 (pre-, post- implementation), and collected albumin and SGSS at time of consultation, date of GT insertion, and outcomes including vital status and albumin 30 days post-consultation. Patients were followed until 30 October 2016. We compared outcomes pre- and post-implementation.
Results: A total of 126 referrals were reviewed, 68 pre- and 58 post-algorithm implementation. Seventy-seven GTs were placed; 58 (75.3%) fulfilled the algorithm-appropriate indications. The mean SGSS was significantly lower among patients in whom GT was placed for algorithm-appropriate indications 2.03 (SD =0.86) vs inappropriate indications (2.59, SD =0.63; p<0.001). Sixty-five (51.6%) patients died by conclusion of study. Thirty day mortality after GT placement was 26.2% (post- (22.4%) vs pre- (29.4%)). Changes in serum albumin at day 30 was non-significant.
Conclusion The use of algorithm guidance by the prospective use of the SGSS was associated with a higher likelihood of GT placement both overall and for algorithm-appropriate indications.
Keywords: quality, improvement, feeding tube, PEG tube, nutrition, ethics, outcomes
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]