Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27999847›Full record

SynthesisThe journal of nutrition, health & aging2017

Tube Feeding among Elder in Long-Term Care Facilities: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

S-H Lan, L-C Lu, Y-Y Yen, Y-P Hsieh, J-C Chen, W J Wu, S-J Lan, L-Y Lin

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The journal of nutrition, health & aging, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Intergenerational Factors Influencing Household Cohabitation in Urban China: Chengdu.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

S-H LanShou-Jen Lan, Department of Healthcare Administration, Asia University, No. 500, Lioufeng Rd., Wufeng District, Taichung City 41354, Taiwan. shoujenlan@gmail.com, Tel: +886-4-2332-3456 ext. 1945.6414, Fax number: +886-4-2332-1206.
L-C Lu
Y-Y Yen
Y-P Hsieh
J-C Chen
W J Wu
S-J Lan
L-Y Lin
Chung Shan Medical University · TWNational Yunlin University of Science and Technology · TWAsia University · TWKaohsiung Medical University · TWNational Taichung University of Science and Technology · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe use of tube feeding for elderly patients with poor nutritional intake is a ubiquitous method of feeding. This systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out to compare nutritional benefits of enteral feeding versus oral feeding in long-term care facilities.

settingDatabases including the Cochrane Library, ProQuest, PubMed, EMBASE, EBSCO, Web of Science and Google Scholar through April 2014 using keywords including enteral feeding, tube feeding or oral feeding combined with long term care facilities or nursing home.

participantsEight articles, with 841 participants were included in meta-analysis and 13 articles were included in systematic review. The elderly had to live in long-term care institutions and could not be on any mechanically assisted ventilation systems or be in any type of post-operative status. MEASUREMENTS: The three investigators extracted and appraised data using the same study design, baseline characteristics, and outcomes, independently.

resultsFollowing a systematic review, 13 articles out of 8218 original research articles were selected for this analysis. Meta-analysis of tube-fed patients found lower levels of hemoglobin (Weighted Mean Difference (WMD -0.21g/dl; 95% CI -0.42 to -0.01; p=0.04) and creatinine (WMD -0.08g/dl; 95% CI -0.17 to 0.00, p=0.05). Moreover, the results showed that there were no benefits regarding body mass index (BMI), albumin, dietary intake of proteins, total calories and fat.

conclusionsThe results show that tube feeding does not increase patients' nutrients absorption to improve nutritional status. Instead, these results indicate that oral feeding is better regarding some nutritional biochemical parameters.

Indexed as

Long-Term CareNursing HomesAgedAged, 80 and overDatabases, FactualEnteral NutritionHumansNutritional StatusObservational Studies as Topic

Identifiers

PMID27999847
PMCPMC12879231
OpenAlexW2333548083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.