关于不同补充喂养方法及相关儿科神经康复结局的探索性评估。
An Exploratory Assessment on Differing Supplemental Feeding Methods and Associated Pediatric Neurorehabilitation Outcomes.
文献信息
| PMID | 42769644 |
|---|---|
| 原文 | 在 PubMed 查看原文 ↗ |
| 发表日期 | 2026 |
| 作者 | Jennifer Wu |
| 作者单位 | Division of Pediatric Rehabilitation Medicine, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Boston, MA. |
| 期刊 | Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation |
| SCI 分区 | Q2 |
| IF | 2.5 |
| 研究类型 | 临床研究 · 临床 |
| 所属专科 | 咽喉科 |
中文摘要
目的: 识别持续鼻胃管(NG)与新建胃造瘘(GT)管在儿科神经康复住院患者(IPR)肠内喂养支持中的功能差异。
设计: 回顾性队列研究。
地点: 儿科IPR机构。
参与者: 共74名儿童和青少年(N=74)(47名男孩/27名女孩,年龄均值±标准差=10.7±5.1岁),因获得性脑损伤导致新发神经功能损害,并因补充喂养以NG或新建GT管入住儿科IPR。
干预: 标准治疗IPR治疗。
主要结局指标: 主要结局指标为IPR入院和出院时国际吞咽障碍饮食标准化倡议功能饮食量表(IDDSI-FDS)评分的变化。次要结局指标包括儿童功能独立性评定量表(WeeFIM)的认知成分和体重指数。
结果: 入院时,持续NG(51%)和新建GT(49%)的比例相似。IPR治疗导致进食功能(IDDSI-FDS评分中位数[四分位距],0[0-2.25]至8[4.75-8]分;χ2=44.9;P<.001)和认知功能(WeeFIM认知亚量表评分均值±标准差=12.2±6.5至19.4±7.9分,t=9.25,P<.001)出现统计学显著改善。对于禁食患者,以GT入院与较高的出院IDDSI-FDS出院评分(GT=7[0-8] vs NG=5[0.75-8];χ2=11.1;P=.09)以及所有WeeFIM认知成分评分变化更大的效应量相关。相反,NG与入院时较低的体重指数和IPR治疗期间较少的体重增加相关。
结论: IPR入院时的喂养管类型可能与因获得性脑损伤导致新发神经功能损害的患者出院回家时的功能结局相关。
英文摘要
OBJECTIVE: To identify functional differences of continued nasogastric tube (NG) compared with new gastrostomy (GT) tube for enteral feeding support in pediatric neurorehabilitation patients admitted to inpatient rehabilitation (IPR).
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study.
SETTING: Pediatric IPR facility.
PARTICIPANTS: A total of 74 children and adolescents (N=74) (47 boys/27 girls, age mean ± SD=10.7±5.1y) with new neurologic impairments because of acquired brain injury and admitted to pediatric IPR with either NG or new GT tube for supplemental feeding.
INTERVENTIONS: Standard of care IPR treatment.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the change in International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative Functional Diet Scale (IDDSI-FDS) score at IPR admission and discharge. Secondary outcome measures included the cognitive components of the Functional Independence Measure in Children (WeeFIM) and body mass index.
RESULTS: At admission, rates of continued NG (51%) and new GT (49%) were similar. IPR treatment resulted in statistically significant improvements in eating function (IDDSI-FDS score median [interquartile range], 0 [0-2.25] to 8 [4.75-8] points; χ2=44.9; P<.001) and cognitive function (WeeFIM Cognition subtotal score mean ± SD=12.2±6.5 to 19.4±7.9 points, t=9.25, P<.001). For nil per os patients, admission with GT was associated with a higher discharge IDDSI-FDS discharge score (GT=7 [0-8] vs NG=5 [0.75-8]; χ2=11.1; P=.09) and a larger effect size in score change across all WeeFIM Cognition components. In contrast, NG was associated with lower body mass index at admission and lesser weight gain across IPR treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Feeding tube type at IPR admission may be correlated with functional outcome at discharge home in patients with new neurologic impairments because of acquired brain injury.