IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v28y2019i17-18p3149-3157.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patients and home carers' experience and perceptions of different modalities of enteral feeding

Author

Listed:
  • Shin Yuh Ang
  • Mei Ling Lim
  • Xin Ping Ng
  • Madeleine Lam
  • Mei Mei Chan
  • Violeta Lopez
  • Siew Hoon Lim

Abstract

Aims and objectives To explore patients and carers' experience and perceptions of different modalities of long‐term enteral feeding. Background With an ageing population in Singapore, there is a concomitant increase in number of patients with dysphagia and hence increase in prevalence of enteral feeding. It is essential to understand experiences of patients and home carers with long‐term home enteral feeding and perceptions of different modalities to better provide support. Design A qualitative descriptive approach fulfilling the COREQ checklist criteria (See File S1). Nine patients who were receiving long‐term enteral feeding and nine carers were recruited over the period of August to December 2017. One‐to‐one interviews were conducted and audio‐recorded. An inductive content analysis approach, with open coding, creation of categories and abstraction of data, was adopted. Results Three themes were generated: (a) factors influencing choice of mode of enteral feeding; respondents narrated factors such as need to “conceal” illness, need to be independent and previous bad experience with alternative modality (b) identified informational, emotional and physical needs. Respondents reported the need for support in terms of information on the different modalities, and training on how to self‐care or provide care and (c) individual perception and attitude towards life with enteral feeding. Most respondents portrayed a positive outlook to life, despite that they could no longer participate in communal eating. Conclusion and Relevance to clinical practice Understanding patients and carers' experience and perceptions will inform the development of strategies to empower future patients and carers in choice of modality for enteral feeding. Patients with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) found it easier to integrate enteral tube feeding into daily lives. Carers played a pivotal role in choice of modality, as well as in care of patients on enteral feeding.

Suggested Citation

  • Shin Yuh Ang & Mei Ling Lim & Xin Ping Ng & Madeleine Lam & Mei Mei Chan & Violeta Lopez & Siew Hoon Lim, 2019. "Patients and home carers' experience and perceptions of different modalities of enteral feeding," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(17-18), pages 3149-3157, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:28:y:2019:i:17-18:p:3149-3157
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14863
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14863
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.14863?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mei Ling Lim & Bei Yi Paulynn Yong & Mei Qi Maggie Mar & Shin Yuh Ang & Mei Mei Chan & Madeleine Lam & Ngian Choo Janet Chong & Violeta Lopez, 2018. "Caring for patients on home enteral nutrition: Reported complications by home carers and perspectives of community nurses," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(13-14), pages 2825-2835, July.
    2. Lily Yeh & Li‐Hua Lo & Susan Fetzer & Ching‐Huey Chen, 2010. "Limited PEG tube use: the experience of long‐term care directions," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(19‐20), pages 2897-2906, October.
    3. Li‐Chan Lin & Mei‐Hui Li & Roger Watson, 2011. "A survey of the reasons patients do not chose percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy/jejunostomy (PEG/PEJ) as a route for long‐term feeding," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(5‐6), pages 802-810, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sue M. Green & Kay Townsend & Nikki Jarrett & Catherine Westoby & Mandy Fader, 2019. "People with enteral tubes and their carers' views of living with a tube and managing associated problems: A qualitative interview study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(19-20), pages 3710-3720, October.
    2. Szu-Yu Hsiao & Ching-Teng Yao & Yi-Ting Lin & Shun-Te Huang & Chi-Chen Chiou & Ching-Yu Huang & Shan-Shan Huang & Cheng-Wei Yen & Hsiu-Yueh Liu, 2022. "Relationship between Aspiration Pneumonia and Feeding Care among Home Care Patients with an In-Dwelling Nasogastric Tube in Taiwan: A Preliminary Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-11, April.
    3. Mei Ling Lim & Bei Yi Paulynn Yong & Mei Qi Maggie Mar & Shin Yuh Ang & Mei Mei Chan & Madeleine Lam & Ngian Choo Janet Chong & Violeta Lopez, 2018. "Caring for patients on home enteral nutrition: Reported complications by home carers and perspectives of community nurses," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(13-14), pages 2825-2835, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:28:y:2019:i:17-18:p:3149-3157. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.