ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2004
Trends in the use of feeding tubes in North Carolina hospitals.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oral feeding options for people with dementia: a systematic review.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2011Pooled it
- Pre-hospitalization dysphagia and feeding tube placement in nursing home residents with advanced dementia.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2024Article
- Is short-term percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement beneficial in acutely ill cognitively intact elderly patients? A proposed decision-making algorithm.Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2015Article
- Special considerations for endoscopists on PEG indications in older patients.ISRN gastroenterology · 2012Article
- Natural history of feeding-tube use in nursing home residents with advanced dementia.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2009Article
- Physicians' expectations of benefit from tube feeding.Journal of palliative medicine · 2008Article
- Death and primary care.Journal of general internal medicine · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveNational data describing the placement of feeding tubes demonstrated a rapid increase in use in the early and mid-1990s. In the past several years, substantial concerns have arisen regarding the appropriateness of the procedure in many chronically ill patients. The purpose of this study is to determine whether the use of feeding tubes has continued to increase through the 1990s despite these widely publicized concerns.
designRepeated measure cross-sectional study of the North Carolina Discharge Database.
settingAnalyses of all nonfederal hospital inpatient admissions in North Carolina. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsWe examined the absolute numbers and rates of feeding tube placements from 1989 to 2000. The rate of feeding tube placement increased from 59/100,000 persons in 1989 to 94/100,000 persons in 2000, an overall 60% increase with slowing in the rate of increase in the late 1990s. However, when outpatient procedures were included, the increase in tube feeding continued throughout the 11-year period of observation. The increase was due to an increase in utilization within all hospitals over the time period. Utilization did not differ between profit and not for profit hospitals. The relative growth rate of inpatient feeding tube placement did not differ by age group but the absolute increase was greatest in those age 75 years and over.
conclusionsOur study demonstrates that the use of feeding tubes has continued to increase through the 1990s. This increase occurred despite ongoing controversy in the medical literature about feeding tube placement in chronically ill patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.