Use and safety of enteral nutrition protocols in acute care: A scoping review of literature and retrospective audit of practice.

AIM: Standardised enteral nutrition protocols are recommended in critical care, however their use and safety are not well described in other inpatient populations. This mixed methods study reports on the use and safety of enteral nutrition protocols for non-critically ill adults. METHODS: A scoping review of published literature was conducted. In addition a retrospective audit of practice at an Australian tertiary teaching hospital with an existing hospital-wide standardised enteral nutrition protocol was performed. Data on use, safety and adequacy of enteral nutrition prescription were collected from medical records for patients receiving enteral nutrition on acute wards (January-March 2020). RESULTS: Screening of 9298 records yielded six primary research articles. Studies were generally low quality. Published literature suggested that protocols may reduce time to enteral nutrition initiation and goal rate, and improve adequacy of nutrition provision. No adverse outcomes were reported. From the local audit of practice (105 admissions, 98 patients), enteral nutrition commencement was timely (median 0 (IQR 0-1) days from request; goal rate: median 1 (IQR 0-2) days from commencement and adequate (nil underfeeding), without prior dietitian review in 82% of cases. Enteral nutrition was commenced per protocol in 61% of instances. No adverse events, including refeeding syndrome, were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Most inpatients requiring enteral nutrition can be safely and adequately managed on enteral nutrition protocols. Evaluation of protocols outside of the critical care setting remains a gap in the literature. Standardised enteral nutrition protocols may improve delivery of nutrition to patients, whilst allowing dietitians to focus on those with specialised nutrition support needs.

Reliability and validity of the Euthanasia Attitude Scale (EAS) for Hong Kong medical doctors.

This study aimed to examine the reliability and validity of the Euthanasia Attitude Scale (EAS) in Hong Kong medical doctors. A total of 107 medical doctors (61.7% men) participated in a survey at clinical settings in 2008. The 21-item EAS was used to assess their attitudes toward euthanasia. The mean (standard deviation) and median of the EAS were 63.60 (60.31) and 63.00. Total EAS scores correlated well with ''Ethical Considerations,'' ''Practical Considerations,'' and ''Treasuring Life'' (Spearman rho =.37-.96, P < .001) but not ''Naturalistic Beliefs.'' The construct validity of the 3-factor model was appropriate (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin [KMO] value = 0.90) and showed high internal consistency (Cronbach alpha =.79-.92). Euthanasia Attitude Scale may be a reliable and valid measure for assessing the attitudes toward euthanasia in medical professionals.