Risk Assessment of Intermittent and Continuous Nasogastric Enteral Feeding Methods in Adult Inpatients: A Meta-Analysis

Diarrhea and pneumonia are common and serious complications in hospitalized patients requiring nasogastric enteral feeding. Our study aimed to compare the risk of diarrhea and pneumonia between intermittent nasogastric enteral feeding (IEF) and continuous nasogastric enteral feeding (CEF). We system...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Guang Yang, Bojun Zheng, Yi Yu
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Hindawi Limited 2021-01-01
Series:Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/8875002
id doaj-afb5d642e7544538ba3d1a479f250072
record_format Article
spelling doaj-afb5d642e7544538ba3d1a479f2500722021-02-15T12:53:00ZengHindawi LimitedEvidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine1741-427X1741-42882021-01-01202110.1155/2021/88750028875002Risk Assessment of Intermittent and Continuous Nasogastric Enteral Feeding Methods in Adult Inpatients: A Meta-AnalysisGuang Yang0Bojun Zheng1Yi Yu2Department of Critical Care Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510006, Guangdong, ChinaDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510006, Guangdong, ChinaDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510006, Guangdong, ChinaDiarrhea and pneumonia are common and serious complications in hospitalized patients requiring nasogastric enteral feeding. Our study aimed to compare the risk of diarrhea and pneumonia between intermittent nasogastric enteral feeding (IEF) and continuous nasogastric enteral feeding (CEF). We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane for relevant articles published from August 9, 1992, to September 1, 2019. A total of 637 IEF and CEF patients were included in our meta-analysis. Odds ratios (ORs) with associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to estimate the effects of diarrhea and pneumonia. We showed that hospital patients that required IEF had an increased risk of diarrhea compared with CEF. In the subgroup analyses, similar conclusions were identified in the non-China group and small sample size group (size < 100). However, our results showed no significant differences in the China group or large sample size group (size ≥ 100). Furthermore, our analysis showed that no significant association was observed for the risk of pneumonia between IEF and CEF patients. For inpatients requiring nasogastric enteral feeding, CEF is a better method of enteral nutrition compared with IEF, of which patients experience a significantly increased risk of diarrhea.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/8875002
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Guang Yang
Bojun Zheng
Yi Yu
spellingShingle Guang Yang
Bojun Zheng
Yi Yu
Risk Assessment of Intermittent and Continuous Nasogastric Enteral Feeding Methods in Adult Inpatients: A Meta-Analysis
Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
author_facet Guang Yang
Bojun Zheng
Yi Yu
author_sort Guang Yang
title Risk Assessment of Intermittent and Continuous Nasogastric Enteral Feeding Methods in Adult Inpatients: A Meta-Analysis
title_short Risk Assessment of Intermittent and Continuous Nasogastric Enteral Feeding Methods in Adult Inpatients: A Meta-Analysis
title_full Risk Assessment of Intermittent and Continuous Nasogastric Enteral Feeding Methods in Adult Inpatients: A Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Risk Assessment of Intermittent and Continuous Nasogastric Enteral Feeding Methods in Adult Inpatients: A Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Risk Assessment of Intermittent and Continuous Nasogastric Enteral Feeding Methods in Adult Inpatients: A Meta-Analysis
title_sort risk assessment of intermittent and continuous nasogastric enteral feeding methods in adult inpatients: a meta-analysis
publisher Hindawi Limited
series Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
issn 1741-427X
1741-4288
publishDate 2021-01-01
description Diarrhea and pneumonia are common and serious complications in hospitalized patients requiring nasogastric enteral feeding. Our study aimed to compare the risk of diarrhea and pneumonia between intermittent nasogastric enteral feeding (IEF) and continuous nasogastric enteral feeding (CEF). We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane for relevant articles published from August 9, 1992, to September 1, 2019. A total of 637 IEF and CEF patients were included in our meta-analysis. Odds ratios (ORs) with associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to estimate the effects of diarrhea and pneumonia. We showed that hospital patients that required IEF had an increased risk of diarrhea compared with CEF. In the subgroup analyses, similar conclusions were identified in the non-China group and small sample size group (size < 100). However, our results showed no significant differences in the China group or large sample size group (size ≥ 100). Furthermore, our analysis showed that no significant association was observed for the risk of pneumonia between IEF and CEF patients. For inpatients requiring nasogastric enteral feeding, CEF is a better method of enteral nutrition compared with IEF, of which patients experience a significantly increased risk of diarrhea.
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/8875002
work_keys_str_mv AT guangyang riskassessmentofintermittentandcontinuousnasogastricenteralfeedingmethodsinadultinpatientsametaanalysis
AT bojunzheng riskassessmentofintermittentandcontinuousnasogastricenteralfeedingmethodsinadultinpatientsametaanalysis
AT yiyu riskassessmentofintermittentandcontinuousnasogastricenteralfeedingmethodsinadultinpatientsametaanalysis
_version_ 1714866789583683584