An Acute Model of Care to Guide Eating & Drinking Decisions in the Frail Elderly with Dementia and Dysphagia

Developing a care bundle for children who are eating and drinking with acknowledged risk: A Delphi study with speech and language therapists

BACKGROUND

There is minimal research and no formal written guidance for speech and language therapists (SLTs) managing children eating and drinking with acknowledged risks (EDAR). Many SLTs lack confidence due to the complexity of these cases medically, ethically and emotionally. Guidance is recommended to aid paediatric EDAR management.

AIMS

To establish consensus amongst expert paediatric SLTs regarding core components of a care bundle guiding the management of children who are EDAR.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

A two-round online modified Delphi technique was used. An expert panel of UK SLTs working across paediatric settings (education, hospital, community) were recruited using snowball sampling. Both rounds comprised 36 statements related to potential components of a care bundle, which participants rated on a 7-point scale (strongly agree to strongly disagree), and one open-box question. Consensus was calculated using predetermined criteria (percentage, median and interquartile range) and the final list was ranked by level of importance (mean).

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

A total of 35 participants completed round 1, with 31 completing round 2 (88.6% response rate). Thirty out of 36 statements achieved high to very high consensus. The nine statements reaching very high consensus covered topics such as documentation, capacity, safeguarding and person-centred care.

CONCLUSION & IMPLICATIONS

There is a high level of consensus amongst SLTs about core components for a paediatric EDAR care bundle. This study provides a useful starting point for the future development of a care bundle to manage children who are EDAR.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject There is limited research and guidance for SLTs managing children who are EDAR. In adult populations, care bundles have been introduced with positive effects (e.g., better patient outcomes, increased standardisation of care and clinician confidence) and are seen as a promising avenue for paediatrics. What this study adds to the existing knowledge To the research team's knowledge, this is the first published Delphi study on SLT opinion around a care bundle for paediatric EDAR. There were high levels of consensus amongst UK SLTs and the results highlighted documentation, capacity, safeguarding and person-centred care as key areas in practice. Finally, the results provide a ranked list of components UK SLTs felt are important for developing a care bundle. What are the practical and clinical implications of this work? This study could be a useful starting point for creating a care bundle to support the management of children who are EDAR.

Decisions on eating and drinking in older adults admitted with pneumonia and referred for swallowing difficulties

PURPOSE

Older patients with pneumonia are commonly restricted from oral intake due to concerns towards aspiration. Eating and drinking with acknowledged risks (EDAR) is a shared decision-making process emphasising patient comfort. As part of our project to find the barriers and facilitators of EDAR, we aimed for this initial study to see how frequently EDAR was selected in practice.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study at an acute hospital where EDAR was initially developed, of patients aged ≥ 75 years-old admitted with pneumonia and referred to speech and language therapy.

RESULTS

Out of 216 patients, EDAR decisions were made in 14.4%. The EDAR group had a higher 1-year mortality than the modified/normal diet groups (p < 0.001). Pneumonia recurrence rate did not differ significantly between the groups (p = 0.070).

CONCLUSION

EDAR decisions were comparatively less common and most were associated with end-of-life care. Underlying reasons for the low EDAR application rate must be investigated to maximise patient autonomy and comfort as intended by EDAR while minimising staff burden.

Developing strategies "SATIA": How to manage dysphagia in older people? A Delphi panel consensus

AIM

To develop a set of evidence-informed strategies to assist older people to improve swallowing functions and prevent further damage from complications.

DESIGN

A two-round Delphi survey.

METHODS

An initial set of dysphagia care strategies with 74 relevant items for older people was formed based on a literature review by seven researchers. An online survey was conducted by 21 panellists, and data of experts' opinions were collected and analysed by improved Delphi method.

RESULTS

The positive coefficients in the two rounds of expert consultation were 85.71% and 83.33%, respectively. Consensus was reached with 53 items included and was allocated into the following five sections: (1) screening, (2) assessment, (3) training, (4) interventions and (5) management. These strategies were named with the acronym of each section-"SATIA". The management strategy can be applied to guide the management of older people with dysphagia.

A shared decision-making model about care for people with severe dementia: A qualitative study based on nutrition and hydration decisions in acute hospitals

OBJECTIVES

To understand the decision-making processes regarding eating and drinking for hospital patients with severe dementia and use this data to modify a decision-making model about care for people with severe dementia.

METHODS

From January to May 2021, qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 family carers and hospital staff in England who cared for people with severe dementia during hospital admissions. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using codebook thematic analysis.

RESULTS

We demonstrated a modified decision-making model consisting of six stages of the decision-making process: (i) identify a decision to be made; (ii) exchange information and recognise emotions; (iii) clarify values and preferences of all involved; (iv) consider feasibility of each choice; (v) share preferred choice and make a final decision; and (vi) deliver the decision, monitor outcomes and renegotiation. From this study, decision-making needed to be shared among all people involved and address holistic needs and personal values of people with dementia and family carers. However, hospital staff often made assumptions about the persons' ability to eat and drink without adequate consultation with family carers. The process was impacted by ward culture, professional practice, and legal framework, which might overlook cultural and personal beliefs of the persons and families. Treatment escalation plans could help inform stepwise treatments, create realistic expectations, and guide future decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

Our decision-making model provides clear stages of decision-making processes and can be used to guide clinical practice and policy around care decisions for eating and drinking, which is often poorly supported.

Readmissions to hospital following a decision to eat and drink with acknowledged risk

People with a dysphagia may eat and drink with acknowledged risks (EDAR). The FORWARD care bundle (Feeding via the Oral Route With Acknowledged Risk of Deterioration) is used at our hospital to support patients who are EDAR. This two-year retrospective study of patients supported by FORWARD aimed to determine incidence of EDAR-related readmissions and effects of discharge location and documented preferred place of care in advance care plans. Of 316 patients supported by FORWARD, 200 were discharged alive. 63% (n=126) were not readmitted within six months. Of 74 patients readmitted, 49% had an EDAR-related readmission. Significantly fewer patients wishing to remain at home had EDAR-related readmissions (7%, n=4) than those without a documented preferred place of care (23%, n=30, p<0.01), suggesting advance care plans are effective. Significantly more (23%, n=29) patients discharged to private homes had EDAR-related readmissions than those in nursing/care homes (10%, n=6, p<0.05), which could suggest residential care provides more support.

Prognosis in dysphagic patients who are eating and drinking with acknowledged risk: results from the evaluation of the FORWARD project

BACKGROUND

patients with a permanently unsafe swallow may choose to eat and drink with acknowledged risk (EDAR). Informed decision-making and advance care planning depend on prognosis, but no data have yet been published on outcomes after EDAR decisions.

METHODS

the study was undertaken in 555 hospital inpatients' (mean [SD] age: 83 {12}) EDAR supported by the Feeding via the Oral Route with Acknowledged Risk of Deterioration care bundle between January 2015 and November 2019. Data were collected prospectively on clinical characteristics, dates of discharge, readmissions and death (where relevant). Kaplan-Meier survival functions and readmission risks per surviving patient per month were calculated.

RESULTS

mortality is 56% in the first 3 months after discharge but then mortality risk sharply decreases. The 3-month survival in EDAR patients was more likely in those <75 years of age, those with Parkinson's disease or a structural oral lesion as the dominating cause of dysphagia and those with mental capacity regarding EDAR decisions. Readmission risk in the 3 months post-discharge is 21% but reduces to 12% thereafter (P < 0.001). Thirty-eight percent of readmissions are secondary to EDAR-linked conditions such as chest infections and reduced oral intake.

CONCLUSION

there is a high mortality and readmission risk after an EDAR decision but much of this is frontloaded into the first 3 months, with a relatively favourable prognosis thereafter. This may be an appropriate time-point to reassess the plan for eating and drinking such that it continues to reflect the most appropriate balance of risk, comfort and nutrition.

Mealtime difficulties in adults with mental health conditions: an integrative review

BACKGROUND

Dysphagia and choking are highly prevalent in adults with mental health conditions. However, there is scant research considering the personal experience of dysphagia for this population.

AIMS

To understand the evidence-base for strategies to involve the patient in recognition, assessment and treatment of mealtime difficulties.

METHODS

This integrative review synthesised the literature on the experience of dysphagia in patients with mental health conditions. Patient consultation led to co-designed search terms and eligibility criteria for a systematic search of five scientific databases following Prisma guidance. Quality assessment of the eligible studies and reflexive thematic analysis were completed.

RESULTS

31 studies were included for review. These included case reports, literature reviews and cross-sectional studies. Quality of evidence was weak and no intervention studies were identified. There was scant detail regarding the personal experience of dysphagia or choking. Themes identified related to biomedical perspectives, influencing factors presented without context, and decision-making led by clinicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Guidance on mental healthcare calls attention to under-diagnosis of physical co-morbidities and advocates patient inclusion. However, the patient voice in this population is rarely described regarding dysphagia. Further inclusive research is indicated to explore the impact of dysphagia and choking, and implications for interventions and outcome measures.

The Association Between Use of Rivastigmine and Pneumonia: Systematic Analysis of FDA Adverse Event Reporting System

BACKGROUND

Pneumonia is an inflammatory condition induced by infection of the lungs and is frequently a cause of morbidity and mortality among patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). Some studies have shown a correlation between acetylcholinesterase inhibitor use and elevated pneumonia risk.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to perform a comparative analysis of the number of reported pneumonia cases in individuals prescribed rivastigmine relative to the association between pneumonia risk for other therapeutics including over-the-counter drugs and other AD therapeutics, as reported to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database.

METHODS

A disproportionality analysis was conducted to investigate the association between using rivastigmine and risk of pneumonia. Age, gender, dosage, route of administration, temporality, and geographic distribution of reported cases were also assessed.

RESULTS

Patients prescribed rivastigmine were more likely to report pneumonia as an adverse event than many drugs except galantamine. Males were found to be 46%more likely than females to report pneumonia as an adverse event while likelihood of pneumonia diagnosis increases 3-5-fold in patients older than 65 years of age.

CONCLUSION

The observed elevated frequency of aspiration pneumonia in patients prescribed rivastigmine may be due to an induced cholinergic crisis that is selective for the medulla oblongata, resulting in gastrointestinal distress, impaired swallowing, heightened salivation, and labored breathing. The observed elevated frequency of infectious pneumonia in patients prescribed rivastigmine may also be linked to overstimulation of neurons in the medulla oblongata and downstream suppression of localized inflammatory responses.

Approaches to Eating and Drinking with Acknowledged Risk: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Patients with dysphagia may consider eating and drinking with acknowledged risk (EDAR) instead of artificial hydration/nutrition. Timely consideration of complex issues is required including dysphagia reversibility, risk/benefit discussions, patient wishes, their capacity and best interests.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to establish if EDAR protocols improve care through a systematic literature review with a secondary aim to explore important factors for the development and success of a protocol.

METHODS

PUBMED, MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE were searched for English language articles to May 2019 with terms related to EDAR, dysphagia and end of life. Articles were agreed for inclusion by three independent reviewers. Levels of evidence were assessed using the modified Sackett scale. Study themes were identified and discussed.

RESULTS

8 articles met the inclusion criteria with varied methodology. The highest level of evidence was III (cohort study). Most were limited to patients with dementia, stroke, in older person's wards or residential homes. Three articles described a systematic approach to EDAR for in-patients, reporting reductions in days nil-by-mouth until feeding plans are made and improvements in documentation of decision making, nutrition plans and capacity assessment. Five papers explored the views and knowledge of staff, patients and families/carers relating to EDAR and complex feeding decisions. Formal meta-analysis was not possible due to the level and mix of methodology.

CONCLUSION

There is a paucity of evidence to determine if EDAR protocols improve care. However, support is emerging for a coordinated approach to managing EDAR. Findings suggest having a protocol is not enough; training and communication within teams is essential, together with incorporating feedback from patients and carers, and this justifies further work.

The perils of 'risk feeding'

'Risk feeding' policies, for when people continue to eat and drink despite a perceived risk of choking or aspiration have become common in recent years. We argue that 'feeding' is demeaning language if referring to a person who is eating and drinking rather than to a healthcare technique and that 'risk-anything' is not how decisions are reached. It is true that patients with dysphagia are often unnecessarily designated nil-by-mouth (NBM), especially after a decision has been made that tube feeding is not indicated or is unwanted. However, risk-feeding policies may perpetuate common misperceptions that there is a straightforward relationship between aspiration and pneumonia and that interventions like NBM or tube feeding will reduce the risk of pneumonia. Such policies may reduce the potential for individualised and flexible decision making: many people's swallowing abilities and preferences fluctuate, sometimes from hour to hour, and staff need to have, and be encouraged to use, common sense, flexibility and judgement in these circumstances. There is also the potential for delays in providing food, fluid and medications if meetings must be held and risk-feeding paperwork completed and signed by someone with the necessary seniority and confidence. Further debate and discussion is required before risk-feeding policies become an established standard of care.