ArticleBMJ open quality2023
Impact of a quality improvement programme on the preparation and administration of medications via a nasoenteral feeding tube: 2014-2019 intervention study.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Introducing the Quality Target Administration (QTAP) Profile for Enteral Feeding Tube Medications.Pharmaceutics · 2026Article
- Applying a Group Decision-Making Model within a Quality Program to Improve Medication Safety.Florence Nightingale journal of nursing · 2025Article
- Nurses' Knowledge in the Prevention and Management of Nasointestinal Tube Obstruction: A Cross Sectional Study.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
- Multi-dimensional factors and intervention strategies for nasoenteric tube dysfunction: research progress and future perspectives.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsEvaluate the impact of a quality improvement programme on the reduction of feeding tube obstruction frequencies, analyse the predictive variables of this safety incident, and estimate the economic costs related to the quality improvement programme during the period from 2014 to 2019.
methodsPlan-Do-Study-Act cycles were performed to test the changes in drug preparation and administration processes via a nasoenteral feeding tube and to evaluate the outcome, process and balance measures. Statistical control charts were elaborated, and the bottom-up direct costing methodology was used to estimate the costs of the improvement programme. The impact of the programme on the monitoring measures was evaluated using logistic regression analysis.
interventionsThe following changes were tested in the hospital participating in the study: acquisition of the Easy Crush equipment for tablet crushing, use of appropriate packaging to crush hard tablets, standardise procedures for scheduling administration times and/or substitution of the pharmaceutical form, educational activities for the nursing team and elaboration and availability of infographics for the nursing team, patients and/or family/caregivers.
resultsThere was a significant improvement in the frequency of tube obstructions, from 41.1% in 2014 to 57.9% in 2015-2017 and 9.6% in 2018-2019 (p=0.0010). After the execution of the improvement programme, it was estimated that the cost of dose preparation was reduced from R$1067.50 in 2014 to R$719.80 in 2015-2017 and R$433.10 in 2015-2019.
conclusionBy re-establishing the processes of drug preparation and administration via a nasoenteral feeding tube, through the acquisition of appropriate equipment for crushing hard tablets, together with educational activities for the nursing team, we could observe a reduction in tube obstructions and the cost of processes.
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.