Cargando…

Can they stomach it? Parent and practitioner acceptability of a trial comparing gastric residual volume measurement versus no gastric residual volume in UK NNU and PICUs: a feasibility study

BACKGROUND: Routine measurement of gastric residual volume (GRV) to guide feeding in neonatal and paediatric intensive care is widespread. However, this practice is not evidence based and may cause harm. As part of a feasibility study, we explored parent and practitioner views on the acceptability o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Deja, Elizabeth, Roper, Louise, Tume, Lyvonne N., Dorling, Jon, Gale, Chris, Arch, Barbara, Latten, Lynne, Pathan, Nazima, Eccleson, Helen, Hickey, Helen, Preston, Jenny, Beissel, Anne, Andrzejewska, Izabela, Valla, Frédéric V., Woolfall, Kerry
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7885383/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33593416
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-021-00784-5
_version_ 1783651593061662720
author Deja, Elizabeth
Roper, Louise
Tume, Lyvonne N.
Dorling, Jon
Gale, Chris
Arch, Barbara
Latten, Lynne
Pathan, Nazima
Eccleson, Helen
Hickey, Helen
Preston, Jenny
Beissel, Anne
Andrzejewska, Izabela
Valla, Frédéric V.
Woolfall, Kerry
author_facet Deja, Elizabeth
Roper, Louise
Tume, Lyvonne N.
Dorling, Jon
Gale, Chris
Arch, Barbara
Latten, Lynne
Pathan, Nazima
Eccleson, Helen
Hickey, Helen
Preston, Jenny
Beissel, Anne
Andrzejewska, Izabela
Valla, Frédéric V.
Woolfall, Kerry
author_sort Deja, Elizabeth
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Routine measurement of gastric residual volume (GRV) to guide feeding in neonatal and paediatric intensive care is widespread. However, this practice is not evidence based and may cause harm. As part of a feasibility study, we explored parent and practitioner views on the acceptability of a trial comparing GRV measurement or no GRV measurement. METHODS: A mixed-methods study involving interviews and focus groups with practitioners and interviews with parents with experience of tube feeding in neonatal and/or paediatric intensive care. A voting system recorded closed question responses during practitioner data collection, enabling the collection of quantitative and qualitative data. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and descriptive statistics. RESULTS: We interviewed 31 parents and nine practitioners and ran five practitioner focus groups (n=42). Participants described how the research question was logical, and the intervention would not be invasive and potential benefits of not withholding the child’s feeds. However, both groups held concerns about the potential risk of not measuring GRV, including delayed diagnosis of infection and gut problems, increased risk of vomiting into lungs and causing discomfort or pain. Parent’s views on GRV measurement and consent decision making were influenced by their views on the importance of feeding in the ICU, their child’s prognosis and associated comorbidities or complications. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of parents and practitioners viewed the proposed trial as acceptable. Potential concerns and preferences were identified that will need careful consideration to inform the development of the proposed trial protocol and staff training. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40814-021-00784-5.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7885383
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78853832021-02-17 Can they stomach it? Parent and practitioner acceptability of a trial comparing gastric residual volume measurement versus no gastric residual volume in UK NNU and PICUs: a feasibility study Deja, Elizabeth Roper, Louise Tume, Lyvonne N. Dorling, Jon Gale, Chris Arch, Barbara Latten, Lynne Pathan, Nazima Eccleson, Helen Hickey, Helen Preston, Jenny Beissel, Anne Andrzejewska, Izabela Valla, Frédéric V. Woolfall, Kerry Pilot Feasibility Stud Research BACKGROUND: Routine measurement of gastric residual volume (GRV) to guide feeding in neonatal and paediatric intensive care is widespread. However, this practice is not evidence based and may cause harm. As part of a feasibility study, we explored parent and practitioner views on the acceptability of a trial comparing GRV measurement or no GRV measurement. METHODS: A mixed-methods study involving interviews and focus groups with practitioners and interviews with parents with experience of tube feeding in neonatal and/or paediatric intensive care. A voting system recorded closed question responses during practitioner data collection, enabling the collection of quantitative and qualitative data. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and descriptive statistics. RESULTS: We interviewed 31 parents and nine practitioners and ran five practitioner focus groups (n=42). Participants described how the research question was logical, and the intervention would not be invasive and potential benefits of not withholding the child’s feeds. However, both groups held concerns about the potential risk of not measuring GRV, including delayed diagnosis of infection and gut problems, increased risk of vomiting into lungs and causing discomfort or pain. Parent’s views on GRV measurement and consent decision making were influenced by their views on the importance of feeding in the ICU, their child’s prognosis and associated comorbidities or complications. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of parents and practitioners viewed the proposed trial as acceptable. Potential concerns and preferences were identified that will need careful consideration to inform the development of the proposed trial protocol and staff training. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40814-021-00784-5. BioMed Central 2021-02-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7885383/ /pubmed/33593416 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-021-00784-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Deja, Elizabeth
Roper, Louise
Tume, Lyvonne N.
Dorling, Jon
Gale, Chris
Arch, Barbara
Latten, Lynne
Pathan, Nazima
Eccleson, Helen
Hickey, Helen
Preston, Jenny
Beissel, Anne
Andrzejewska, Izabela
Valla, Frédéric V.
Woolfall, Kerry
Can they stomach it? Parent and practitioner acceptability of a trial comparing gastric residual volume measurement versus no gastric residual volume in UK NNU and PICUs: a feasibility study
title Can they stomach it? Parent and practitioner acceptability of a trial comparing gastric residual volume measurement versus no gastric residual volume in UK NNU and PICUs: a feasibility study
title_full Can they stomach it? Parent and practitioner acceptability of a trial comparing gastric residual volume measurement versus no gastric residual volume in UK NNU and PICUs: a feasibility study
title_fullStr Can they stomach it? Parent and practitioner acceptability of a trial comparing gastric residual volume measurement versus no gastric residual volume in UK NNU and PICUs: a feasibility study
title_full_unstemmed Can they stomach it? Parent and practitioner acceptability of a trial comparing gastric residual volume measurement versus no gastric residual volume in UK NNU and PICUs: a feasibility study
title_short Can they stomach it? Parent and practitioner acceptability of a trial comparing gastric residual volume measurement versus no gastric residual volume in UK NNU and PICUs: a feasibility study
title_sort can they stomach it? parent and practitioner acceptability of a trial comparing gastric residual volume measurement versus no gastric residual volume in uk nnu and picus: a feasibility study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7885383/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33593416
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-021-00784-5
work_keys_str_mv AT dejaelizabeth cantheystomachitparentandpractitioneracceptabilityofatrialcomparinggastricresidualvolumemeasurementversusnogastricresidualvolumeinuknnuandpicusafeasibilitystudy
AT roperlouise cantheystomachitparentandpractitioneracceptabilityofatrialcomparinggastricresidualvolumemeasurementversusnogastricresidualvolumeinuknnuandpicusafeasibilitystudy
AT tumelyvonnen cantheystomachitparentandpractitioneracceptabilityofatrialcomparinggastricresidualvolumemeasurementversusnogastricresidualvolumeinuknnuandpicusafeasibilitystudy
AT dorlingjon cantheystomachitparentandpractitioneracceptabilityofatrialcomparinggastricresidualvolumemeasurementversusnogastricresidualvolumeinuknnuandpicusafeasibilitystudy
AT galechris cantheystomachitparentandpractitioneracceptabilityofatrialcomparinggastricresidualvolumemeasurementversusnogastricresidualvolumeinuknnuandpicusafeasibilitystudy
AT archbarbara cantheystomachitparentandpractitioneracceptabilityofatrialcomparinggastricresidualvolumemeasurementversusnogastricresidualvolumeinuknnuandpicusafeasibilitystudy
AT lattenlynne cantheystomachitparentandpractitioneracceptabilityofatrialcomparinggastricresidualvolumemeasurementversusnogastricresidualvolumeinuknnuandpicusafeasibilitystudy
AT pathannazima cantheystomachitparentandpractitioneracceptabilityofatrialcomparinggastricresidualvolumemeasurementversusnogastricresidualvolumeinuknnuandpicusafeasibilitystudy
AT ecclesonhelen cantheystomachitparentandpractitioneracceptabilityofatrialcomparinggastricresidualvolumemeasurementversusnogastricresidualvolumeinuknnuandpicusafeasibilitystudy
AT hickeyhelen cantheystomachitparentandpractitioneracceptabilityofatrialcomparinggastricresidualvolumemeasurementversusnogastricresidualvolumeinuknnuandpicusafeasibilitystudy
AT prestonjenny cantheystomachitparentandpractitioneracceptabilityofatrialcomparinggastricresidualvolumemeasurementversusnogastricresidualvolumeinuknnuandpicusafeasibilitystudy
AT beisselanne cantheystomachitparentandpractitioneracceptabilityofatrialcomparinggastricresidualvolumemeasurementversusnogastricresidualvolumeinuknnuandpicusafeasibilitystudy
AT andrzejewskaizabela cantheystomachitparentandpractitioneracceptabilityofatrialcomparinggastricresidualvolumemeasurementversusnogastricresidualvolumeinuknnuandpicusafeasibilitystudy
AT vallafredericv cantheystomachitparentandpractitioneracceptabilityofatrialcomparinggastricresidualvolumemeasurementversusnogastricresidualvolumeinuknnuandpicusafeasibilitystudy
AT woolfallkerry cantheystomachitparentandpractitioneracceptabilityofatrialcomparinggastricresidualvolumemeasurementversusnogastricresidualvolumeinuknnuandpicusafeasibilitystudy