Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Dysphagia 3/2008

01-09-2008 | Original Article

A Pilot Study Exploring the Factors that Influence the Decision to have PEG Feeding in Patients with Progressive Conditions

Authors: Siobhan Vesey, Paula Leslie, Catherine Exley

Published in: Dysphagia | Issue 3/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

This original pilot study was conducted to explore and understand the factors that influence a patient’s decision-making when considering percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement for nonoral nutrition and hydration supplementation. Seven patients living with progressive dysphagic symptoms who had made a decision about percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement were interviewed and their responses analyzed using the constant comparison method. All participants felt they had no option other than to accept the percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. The impact of visible physical deterioration and medical opinion were the most powerful influences on patients’ decisions. Patients’ perception of their involvement in the decision varied. This was linked to the amount and timing of information supplied and support they felt they received. Few patients have prior knowledge of tube feeding and rely heavily on medical advice. Effective communication by healthcare professionals can promote an environment that is supportive of patients’ involvement in decisions. Adequate preparation time is vital if patients are to stop feeling uninvolved or peripheral to the decision-making process. Multidisciplinary teams need to address their working practices so that they do not intimidate patients, but rather empower patients in their decision-making.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Jones DB, Russell C, Glencourse C. BANS: Topline results from the British Artificial Nutrition Survey you really need to know. Complete Nutr 2004;4 Jones DB, Russell C, Glencourse C. BANS: Topline results from the British Artificial Nutrition Survey you really need to know. Complete Nutr 2004;4
2.
go back to reference Goodhall L. Tube feeding dilemmas: can artificial nutrition and hydration be legally or ethically withheld or withdrawn. J Adv Nurs 1997;25:217–222PubMedCrossRef Goodhall L. Tube feeding dilemmas: can artificial nutrition and hydration be legally or ethically withheld or withdrawn. J Adv Nurs 1997;25:217–222PubMedCrossRef
3.
4.
5.
go back to reference Rabeneck L, McCullough L, Wray N. Ethically justified, clinically comprehensive guidelines for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement. Lancet 1997;349:496–498PubMedCrossRef Rabeneck L, McCullough L, Wray N. Ethically justified, clinically comprehensive guidelines for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement. Lancet 1997;349:496–498PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Collaboration TFT, Dennis M. Effect of timing and method of enteral tube feeding for dysphagic stroke patients (FOOD): a mulicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2005;365:764–772 Collaboration TFT, Dennis M. Effect of timing and method of enteral tube feeding for dysphagic stroke patients (FOOD): a mulicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2005;365:764–772
8.
go back to reference Klose J, Heldwein W, Rafferzeder M, Sernetz F, Gross M, Loeschke K. Nutritional status and quality of life in patients with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in practice. Prospective one year follow-up. Dig Dis Sci 2003;48:2057–2063PubMedCrossRef Klose J, Heldwein W, Rafferzeder M, Sernetz F, Gross M, Loeschke K. Nutritional status and quality of life in patients with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in practice. Prospective one year follow-up. Dig Dis Sci 2003;48:2057–2063PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Craig GM, Scambler G. Negotiating mothering against the odds: gastrostomy tube feeding, stigma, governmentality and disabled children. Soc Sci Med 2006;62:1115–1125PubMedCrossRef Craig GM, Scambler G. Negotiating mothering against the odds: gastrostomy tube feeding, stigma, governmentality and disabled children. Soc Sci Med 2006;62:1115–1125PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Borrell-Carrio F, Suchman AL, Epstein RM. The biopsychosocial model 25 years later: principles, practice, and scientific inquiry. Ann Fam Med 2004;2:576–582PubMedCrossRef Borrell-Carrio F, Suchman AL, Epstein RM. The biopsychosocial model 25 years later: principles, practice, and scientific inquiry. Ann Fam Med 2004;2:576–582PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Colodny N. Dysphagic independent feeders’ justifications for noncompliance with recommendations by a speech-language pathologist. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 2005;14:61–70PubMedCrossRef Colodny N. Dysphagic independent feeders’ justifications for noncompliance with recommendations by a speech-language pathologist. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 2005;14:61–70PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Deber R, Kraetschmer N, Irvine J. What role do patients wish to play in treatment decision making? Arch Intern Med 1996;156:1414–1420PubMedCrossRef Deber R, Kraetschmer N, Irvine J. What role do patients wish to play in treatment decision making? Arch Intern Med 1996;156:1414–1420PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Mazur D, Hickam D. Patients’ preferences for risk disclosure and role in decision making for invasive medical procedures. J Gen Intern Med 1997;12:114–117PubMedCrossRef Mazur D, Hickam D. Patients’ preferences for risk disclosure and role in decision making for invasive medical procedures. J Gen Intern Med 1997;12:114–117PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Quill T, Brody H. Physician recommendations and patient autonomy: finding a balance between physician power and patient choice. Ann Intern Med 1996;125:763–769PubMed Quill T, Brody H. Physician recommendations and patient autonomy: finding a balance between physician power and patient choice. Ann Intern Med 1996;125:763–769PubMed
15.
go back to reference Strull W, Lo B, Charles G. Do patients want to participate in medical decision making? JAMA 1984;252:2990–2994PubMedCrossRef Strull W, Lo B, Charles G. Do patients want to participate in medical decision making? JAMA 1984;252:2990–2994PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Sackett DL. Evidence-based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 1996;312:71–72PubMed Sackett DL. Evidence-based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 1996;312:71–72PubMed
17.
go back to reference Forbes R, Colville S, Swingler R. Frequency, timing and outcome of gastrostomy tubes for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neurone disease. J Neurol 2004;251:813–817PubMedCrossRef Forbes R, Colville S, Swingler R. Frequency, timing and outcome of gastrostomy tubes for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neurone disease. J Neurol 2004;251:813–817PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Glaser B. The constant comparative methods of qualitative analysis. Social Problems 1965;12:436–445CrossRef Glaser B. The constant comparative methods of qualitative analysis. Social Problems 1965;12:436–445CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Strauss A. Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1987 Strauss A. Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1987
20.
go back to reference Miles M, Huberman M. Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications; 1994 Miles M, Huberman M. Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications; 1994
21.
go back to reference Mays N, Pope C. Rigour and qualitative research. BMJ 1995;311:109–112 Mays N, Pope C. Rigour and qualitative research. BMJ 1995;311:109–112
22.
go back to reference McKinstry B. Do patients wish to be involved in decision making in the consultation? A cross sectional survey with video vignettes. BMJ 2000;321:867–871PubMedCrossRef McKinstry B. Do patients wish to be involved in decision making in the consultation? A cross sectional survey with video vignettes. BMJ 2000;321:867–871PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Schaeffer MH. Environmental stress and individual decision-making: implications for the patient. Patient Educ Couns 1989;13:221–235CrossRef Schaeffer MH. Environmental stress and individual decision-making: implications for the patient. Patient Educ Couns 1989;13:221–235CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Ogden J. Health psychology: a text book. 3rd ed. Berkshire UK: Open University Press; 2004 Ogden J. Health psychology: a text book. 3rd ed. Berkshire UK: Open University Press; 2004
25.
26.
go back to reference Mazur DJ, Hickam DH, Mazur MD, Mazur MD. The role of doctor’s opinion in shared decision making: what does shared decision making really mean when considering invasive medical procedures? Health Expect 2005;8:97–102PubMedCrossRef Mazur DJ, Hickam DH, Mazur MD, Mazur MD. The role of doctor’s opinion in shared decision making: what does shared decision making really mean when considering invasive medical procedures? Health Expect 2005;8:97–102PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Laakkonen M-L, Pitkala K, Strandburg T, Berglind S, Tilvis R. Older people’s reasoning for resuscitation preferences and their role in the decision-making process. Resuscitation 2005;65:165–171PubMedCrossRef Laakkonen M-L, Pitkala K, Strandburg T, Berglind S, Tilvis R. Older people’s reasoning for resuscitation preferences and their role in the decision-making process. Resuscitation 2005;65:165–171PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Sackett D, Strauss S, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB. Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. 2nd ed. London:Churchill Livingstone; 2000 Sackett D, Strauss S, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB. Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. 2nd ed. London:Churchill Livingstone; 2000
29.
go back to reference Drane JF, Coulehan JL. The best-interest standard: surrogate decision making and quality of life. J Clin Ethics 1995;6:20–29PubMed Drane JF, Coulehan JL. The best-interest standard: surrogate decision making and quality of life. J Clin Ethics 1995;6:20–29PubMed
Metadata
Title
A Pilot Study Exploring the Factors that Influence the Decision to have PEG Feeding in Patients with Progressive Conditions
Authors
Siobhan Vesey
Paula Leslie
Catherine Exley
Publication date
01-09-2008
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Dysphagia / Issue 3/2008
Print ISSN: 0179-051X
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0460
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-008-9149-0

Other articles of this Issue 3/2008

Dysphagia 3/2008 Go to the issue