An Investigation Into Maintaining Naso-Gastric Feeding for Stroke Patients: a Mixed Methods Design
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
An Investigation into Maintaining Naso-gastric Feeding for Stroke Patients: A Mixed Methods Design Catherine M. Mahoney Degree awarded by Edinburgh Napier University Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) August 2009 DECLARATION I declare that this thesis is my own work and that no material contained in it has been submitted for another academic award. Catherine M. Mahoney August 2009 Abstract Background Dysphagia is common after stroke, so feeding through a naso-gastric (NG) tube may be necessary. NG tubes are frequently dislodged, potentially causing feed or fluids to enter the lungs. Interventions to prevent this include taping NG tubes to the face, hand mittens and nasal bridles. Overall Aim The aim of this study was to explore the opinions of staff, patients and relatives about the maintenance of NG tube feeding for stroke patients while investigating current clinical practice. Research Design and Methods A three-phased mixed method design was used. Phase 1 involved focus groups with multidisciplinary stroke unit staff (n=17); one-to-one interviews, with stroke patients (n=4) and relatives (n=6). Phase 2 incorporated a postal survey sent to a convenience sample (n=528) registered nurses working in the field of stroke across the UK. Phase 3 involved interviews with nurses (n=5) outside the speciality of stroke. Findings Phase 1 highlighted many categories, including: lack of protocols; ethical and legal concerns; training to insert NG tubes; patient dignity; patient autonomy and potential harms and benefits of interventions used. There were variations in the opinions of staff, patients and relatives concerning the effectiveness and acceptability of methods for securing NG tubes. Phase 2 achieved a response rate of 59% (n=314/528); 22% (n=68/312) of nurses used hand mittens, only 11% (n=34/312) used a protocol; 56% (n=176/314) of nurses had received formal training to insert an NG feeding tube, more senior nurses had been formally trained than junior nurses (p<0.005). Acceptability and effectiveness ratings for tube securing interventions varied: 50% (n=158/312) considered hand mittens to be unacceptable. However, from a total of n=92 responses about their effectiveness, 66% (n=61/92) felt they were effective. Phase 3 produced more detailed results about fear associated with NG feeding; inconsistent approaches to training and ethical and legal issues of patient restraint. Conclusions Overall this study demonstrates differences in opinion about what constitutes acceptable, effective and legal practice when maintaining NG feeding for stroke patients. It also suggests that the lack of consistent nurse training affects the standards of care patients receive. Furthermore, there is a need for more robust evidence to inform clinical practice. This study culminates in a model of nursing related to the insertion and maintenance of NG feeding for stroke patients. Acknowledgements I would like to thank the patients, relatives and staff from NHS Lothian who gave freely of their time and experiences which made this study both possible and significant. Thanks also go to the members of the Scottish and National Stroke Nurses Forums for their time and effort in contributing to the survey; and their clear passion for improving the care of stroke patients. I would like to thank my supervisory team: Professor Beth Alder (Director of Studies) and Dr Maureen Macmillan, for their time, wisdom and encouragement. I would like to offer special thanks to Professor Martin Dennis and Dr Anne Rowat for their supervision and expertise in the earlier stages of my study and to Dr Dorothy Horsburgh for her contribution to phase 1. I am grateful to Professor Gillian Raab and Dr Judy Goldfinch for their statistical advice. I would also like to acknowledge the support of Chest Heart and Stroke Scotland who funded the first two phases of this study. This funding was awarded to Dr Anne Rowat and Professor Martin Dennis. I am deeply appreciative of the contribution that my husband Cairn has made, for his belief, encouragement and relentless support throughout the years; my brother Bernard Ward for his expertise in proof reading and my father for his endless moral support. Finally I would like to thank my friends and colleagues who helped keep me in touch with life. This study was initially intended to follow on from the FOOD Trial (Dennis, Warlow & Lewis, 2005); however, following application to the MREC it became clear that this original plan was not tenable. This resulted in the free-standing research study reported here. To help the reader understand the various responsibilities accepted by different people, a statement follows detailing the work carried out in different phases. Phase 1 The interview schedules (one building on the last) for the focus groups were jointly designed by the researcher and Dr Horsburgh. The focus groups were carried out by the researcher and Dr Horsburgh; Dr Horsburgh conducted the first two while the researcher took field notes and during the last one these roles were reversed. The analysis of focus group data was the responsibility of the researcher. The one-to-one interview schedule for the initial interview was jointly designed using information from the focus groups by the researcher and Dr Horsburgh. Subsequent interview schedules were designed (following constant comparative analysis) by the researcher. The eight interviews were conducted by the researcher who also undertook the analysis of all the data from this phase under supervisory advice. Phase 2 In this phase the design of the questionnaire was carried out by the researcher with advice from supervisors, and the survey and analysis of the data was carried out by the researcher with advice from supervisors and statisticians. Phase 3 The design, conduct and the analysis of this phase was the responsibility of the researcher under supervisory advice. Dedication This thesis is dedicated to my parents Dr John and Mrs Anne Ward TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ..................................................... 1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................ 1 1.1.1 Rationale for the Study ......................................................................... 1 1.2 Background to the Study ....................................................................... 2 1.2.1 Malnutrition in the Healthcare Setting ................................................... 3 1.2.2 Nutrition Screening ............................................................................... 5 1.2.3 Assessments for Dysphagia in Stroke Patients .................................... 6 1.2.4 Enteral Feeding Strategies for Dysphagic Stroke Patients ................... 7 1.2.5 The FOOD Trial .................................................................................... 8 1.2.6 The Role of the Nurse in Implementing Naso-gastric Feeding for Stroke Patients .............................................................................................. 10 1.2.7 NG Tube Insertion in Stroke Patients ................................................. 11 1.2.8 Confirming NG Tube Position ............................................................. 13 1.2.9 Education and Training in NG Feeding ............................................... 15 1.2.10 Maintaining NG Feeding for Stroke Patients ................................... 17 1.2.10.1 Tape ............................................................................................ 18 1.2.10.2 Nasal Bridle ................................................................................. 18 1.2.10.3 Hand Mittens ............................................................................... 19 1.2.10.4 Inserting NG Feeding Tubes on the Stroke-affected Side ........... 20 1.2.11 Using Restraint in Stroke Care ........................................................ 20 1.2.12 Issues for Registered Nurses when Applying Restraint .................. 22 1.2.13 Ethical Implications of Restraint ...................................................... 23 1.2.14 Legal Implications of Restraint ........................................................ 24 1.2.15 Incapacitated Patients ..................................................................... 25 1.2.16 Guidelines and Protocols in NG Feeding and Stroke ...................... 27 1.2.17 Conclusions from the Background Literature .................................. 29 1.3 Summary ............................................................................................... 29 2 A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF STROKE SPECIFIC EVIDENCE ABOUT MAINTAINING EFFECTIVE NASO-GASTRIC (NG) FEEDING FOR STROKE PATIENTS ........................................................................................................ 31 2.1 Introduction .......................................................................................... 31 2.2 Inclusion Criteria .................................................................................. 31 2.3 Exclusion Criteria ................................................................................. 32 2.4 Search Strategy .................................................................................... 32 2.5 Methodological Quality and Critical Review ...................................... 34 2.5.1 Criteria for Critical Review .................................................................. 35 2.6 Results .................................................................................................