Talk:Feeding tube

Euthanasia

I removed the line about euthanasia because withdrawl of care is generally not considered euthanasia, as explained on the euthanasia page. It also seemed a bit POV Osmodiar 10:00, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"Generally not considered euthanasia" implies that some people do consider it euthanasia, so the original page was correct. NPOV should be reached by adding information, not subtracting it. Kappa 10:28, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Indications

It seems a bit odd that the very first "indication" is for force feeding. I can understand this given the recent news in Guantanimo, but I came to this page interested because my nephew is getting one because of a problem with his palate and acid reflux. Anyway, it seems like the reasonable medical reasons should be first in order to avoid any accusation of bias. I was also interested to see if this article referred to the nick name "mickey button" since that's what everyone's been calling the incision. Hanenkamp 02:34, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree it is odd to consider force-feeding an "indication", which implies it is medically sanctioned. I reverted the indications part to the prior version. Dforest 07:37, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Different Types of Tubes added

Hi--we added a lot of really helpful info about different types of feeding tubes to the page. It was all deleted because the links--to a non-profit, and a free non-commercial children's medical site--were considered spammy. The main reason we edited the page is because there is so little information available on the web about feeding tubes. Medical texts provide minimal information on this subject and are notoriously lacking in practical information. There are only two books on tubefeeding available--one for nurses/dieticians and one for patients, neither written by a physician. I would be happy to add the material back in without the references so at least the information is available.

G-Tube

I suppose there should be more sources here in general, but is the gtube type mentioned really the "most common". I have a MIC-KEY tube, the use of which seems much simpler than that described here. If there is no source to back this up I reccomend changing it. Balonkey 05:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC) you

What is a Keofeed tube?

A Keofeed tube is a small tube that goes in through the nose, passing through the oropharynx, esophagus, through the stomach, and into the duodenum past the opening for the Sphincter of Oddi. Through the tube different tube feedings are feed to the patient. These tubes are usually a short term fix, as they can have a higher risk for aspiration. Patients are usually given a Keofeed as a quick solution, allowing time for the patient and/or family/caregiver to decide if a Peg Tube or other long term feeding tube is the right decision. Placement is checked by Xray. No feedings should be initiated until placement is verified. This is to prevent liquid feedings going into the wrong area (lung, brain, etc...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.236.144.37 (talk) 02:20, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Nasogastric

I know nasogastric tubes are still used for feeding, having seen one in use within the past two years, apparently on a patient with anorexia. They should be mentioned here, addressing specifically the indications for them vs the tubes presently described. As written, the article leaves the impression that the only kind of tube feeding there is involves having an incision, and (until my edit just now) that that was being done to prisoners at Gitmo (not everyone would go to the BBC article).Hieronymus Illinensis 21:11, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

It states that it is passed through the nares, meaning no incision is made. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.197.54.32 (talk) 22:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

NG tubes are commonly used in combination with suction to remove food, fluid, blood or other secretions from a patient's GI tract. They are often used in patients who are suffering from some type of Gastritis, GI bleed or bowel obstructions. They are inserted through one nostril and proceed through the oropharynx, esophagus and into the stomach. When helping to remove unwanted content the other end is hooked up to suction. Suction settings include: low, medium, high and can be switched from constant to intermittent suction too. The most common setting is low intermittent suction, so as to not disturb the gastric lining of the stomach and cause any breakdown or ulcer. The gold standard for checking and confirming NG tube placement is to aspirate some fluid and check the pH level. The pH level of gastric secretions should be between 4-6. A secondary way to confirm placement (no longer the gold standard) is to auscultate using a stethoscope by placing the diaphragm of the stethoscope over the stomach and listen while pushing a small bolus of air through the tube. If the tube is indeed in the stomach you will hear a low "whoosh" sound.

NG tubes can be used for feeding, however it is a short term plan and not very safe. Patients who are using an NG tube to get their feedings and nutrients are at an extremely high risk for aspiration. The biggest way to prevent this is to keep the head of their bed raised above 30 degrees. You must continually monitor lung sounds and breathing patterns on patients receiving feedings through an NG tube to make sure that none of the feeding has aspirated into their lungs. This could cause aspiration pneumonia, a very serious pneumonia infection. If a patient will need tube feedings the NG tube can be that route until the patient and/or family/caregiver can make a long term decision for a Peg Tube or other option. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.236.144.37 (talk • contribs) 02:29, 1 July 2013‎

g-tube change

i've had a G-tube for 18 years and i've had the same one in for about 6 years... so my question is how often is it recommended to change it and what can happen if i had it for so long? thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.56.242.215 (talk) 23:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Term 'Gavage' Should be added

I would recommend that the term 'Gavage' should be added to the article, particularly since this term Gavage is redirected to this page. This would also improve the situation where Google points to the 'Force Feeding' page instead of this one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RossO (talk • contribs) 18:47, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Merge with Tubefeeding

As they cover the same topic. Eb.eric (talk) 02:47, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Done. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:59, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Withdrawal

Tube feeding, like all medical treatments, can be declined or stopped, especially in the setting of a terminal illness where its use would not alter the ultimate outcome.

I don't understand this section. If you withdraw feeding tube, how does patient eat food? Through parenteral nutrition? Tomek935 (talk) 01:19, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

"not". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.142.45.81 (talk) 19:45, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Severely malnourished child with feeding tube.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Severely malnourished child with feeding tube.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Severely malnourished child with feeding tube.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 01:51, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Picture with hidden eyes

I'd like to remove from the article the photo of the patient with their eyes covered by digital post-processing. If there's no picture that can be published in its entirety, then it's better to publish no picture at all. Truth is truth, and truth should never be edited when the use of the photo is educational. There's no reason why you should ever edit a photo for educational purposes. Better find a patient who wants to see their pic published. Also, I don't see how the concepts of medical confidentiality and privacy cover only the patient's eyes. Cogiati (talk) 03:45, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

I second removal and can contact a group that could provide multiple images if necessary. Perhaps it would be best to go with a placement diagram instead? Medicalmom (talk) 14:17, 13 December 2012 (UTC)Medicalmom

No History?

Shouldn't there be a section or some mention of the history of feeding tubes? At least when they were first used or created, or that that date is unknown, but some dates might be likely. Right now the article only focuses on modern uses with no hints as to the origins of feeding tubes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.216.134.172 (talk) 15:26, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

This information should be in this article. Here are some sources which could be used to add this content:

• Minard, G. (2006). "The history of surgically placed feeding tubes". Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. 21 (6): 626–633. doi:10.1177/0115426506021006626. PMID 17119170.
• Campbell, S. M. (2006). "An Anthology of Advances in Enteral Tube Feeding Formulations". Nutrition in Clinical Practice. 21 (4): 411–415. doi:10.1177/0115426506021004411. PMID 16870811.

Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:04, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Changes to dementia section

In 2011 user:Syleth made awesome additions to this article, including adding a section about palliative care for patients with dementia. Since that time, there have been five citations backing these statements. There is a lot of existing literature about feeding tubes for people with dementia.

I am incorporating some recommendations from medical societies into various articles, and for guidelines about feeding tubes and dementia, I had eight citations to back up the statement a society wanted to make. I incorporated this into the section Syleth started. I removed all but one of Syleth's original citations, and then added seven other ones as a bundled citation. I also removed some content which Syleth added and then added some other content. I think the intent of the section remains the same - it still says that assisted feeding is preferable over intubation for people with dementia. I removed some details about physical restraint, the concept of failure to thrive (which I felt was not necessarily related to dementia), and assertions about tubes preventing people from doing self care.

I wanted to describe what I did here just because I changed something which was already rather good, but now, the references backing this are at the recommendation of the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Thoughts? Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:42, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Nothing on what is pumped through the tube?

Surely there should be a (non-brand) description of the types of products pumped through the tubes, so I added a section, along with a link to medical foods. David notMD (talk) 02:31, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

We need better refs here. the handwavy pointing to the FDA guidance is not really good... Jytdog (talk) 16:10, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Tube Weaning and Dependency Info

This page has had an ongoing problem with a group of "scientists" who keep editing the page to promote their tube weaning company and increase their profits. They continue to add information about a non-existent condition they call "tube dependency" and cite lots of their own studies to say children who are tube fed will be stunted and suffer terrible other misfortunes. This is simply not accurate science and distorts the reality of tube feeding for children. I've removed, once again, all of their misinformation and their self-promoting studies. Medicalmom (talk) 02:05, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

I highly suggest removing everything in the SIDE EFFECTS section. The actual side effects are covered quite adequately in the complications section.

You can also see their work in the article Tube_dependency. A quick Pubmed search will show you Tube Dependency isn't an accepted medical condition beyond the simple idea that one is dependent on a feeding tube for nutrition. It is not a condition unto itself. 11 of 23 citations are from this group of pseudo-scientists. Medicalmom (talk) 02:15, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Keofed tube used DOW Corning silastic tube developed in the early sixties at Stanford by Leo Keoshian MD. The tube was weighted with metal fillings . The position of the tube could be confirmed.

Designed in the 60s at Stanford U 12.40.223.218 (talk) 16:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)