Skip to main content
PMC home page
CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association Journal logoLink to CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association Journal
. 1999 Jun 15;160(12):1705–1709.

Decision-making for long-term tube-feeding in cognitively impaired elderly people

S L Mitchell 1, F M Lawson 1
PMCID: PMC1230404  PMID: 10410631

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The decision to start long-term tube-feeding in elderly people is complex. The process by which such decisions are made is not well understood. The authors examined the factors involved in the decision to start long-term tube-feeding in cognitively impaired older people from the perspective of the substitute decision-maker. METHODS: A telephone survey was administered to the substitute decision-makers of tube-fed patients over 65 years old in chronic care facilities in Ottawa. Subjects were recruited from September 1997 to March 1998. Patients were incapable of making their own decisions about tube-feeding. Data were collected on sociodemographic factors, patients' health status, advance directives, communication between the substitute decision-maker and the health care team, and the decision-maker's perceived goals of tube-feeding and satisfaction with the decision regarding tube-feeding. RESULTS: Among the 57 cases in which the patient was eligible for inclusion in the study, 46 substitute decision-makers agreed to participate. Most of the patients had not given advance directives, and only 26 substitute decision-makers (56.5%) were confident that the patient would want to be tube-fed. A physician spoke with the substitute decision-maker about tube-feeding for 15 minutes or less in 17 cases (37.0%) and not at all in 13 cases (28.3%). Most of the substitute decision-makers (39 [84.8%]) felt that they understood the benefits of tube-feeding, but less than half (21 [45.7%]) felt that they understood the risks. The prevention of aspiration and the prolongation of life were the medical benefits most often cited as reasons for tube-feeding. Just over half (24 [52.2%]) of the substitute decision-makers felt that they had received adequate support from the health care team in making the decision. Substitute decision-makers of patients less than 75 years old were more likely than those of older patients to feel supported (odds ratio [OR] 4.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-17.9). Compared with the physician's making the decision independently, substitute decision-makers felt more supported if they primarily made the decision (OR 16.5, 95% CI 2.7-101.4) or if they made the decision together with the physician (OR 5.3, 95% CI 1.0-27.9). Most (20 [43.5%]) of the substitute decision-makers did not feel that tube-feeding improved the patient's quality of life, and less than half (21 [45.7%]) indicated that they would choose the intervention for themselves. INTERPRETATION: The substitute decision-making process for tube-feeding in cognitively impaired elderly people is limited by a need for advance directives, lack of confidence in substituted judgement and poor communication of information to the substitute decision-maker by the health care team.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (106.4 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Buchanan Allen, Brock Dan W. Deciding for others. Milbank Q. 1986;64(Suppl 2):17–94. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Cogen R., Patterson B., Chavin S., Cogen J., Landsberg L., Posner J. Surrogate decision-maker preferences for medical care of severely demented nursing home patients. Arch Intern Med. 1992 Sep;152(9):1885–1888. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cogen R., Weinryb J. Aspiration pneumonia in nursing home patients fed via gastrostomy tubes. Am J Gastroenterol. 1989 Dec;84(12):1509–1512. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cogen R., Weinryb J., Pomerantz C., Fenstemacher P. Complications of jejunostomy tube feeding in nursing facility patients. Am J Gastroenterol. 1991 Nov;86(11):1610–1613. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Croghan J. E., Burke E. M., Caplan S., Denman S. Pilot study of 12-month outcomes of nursing home patients with aspiration on videofluoroscopy. Dysphagia. 1994 Summer;9(3):141–146. doi: 10.1007/BF00341256. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Finucane P., Aslan S. M., Duncan D. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in elderly patients. Postgrad Med J. 1991 Apr;67(786):371–373. doi: 10.1136/pgmj.67.786.371. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Finucane T. E., Bynum J. P. Use of tube feeding to prevent aspiration pneumonia. Lancet. 1996 Nov 23;348(9039):1421–1424. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)03369-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Fox K. A., Mularski R. A., Sarfati M. R., Brooks M. E., Warneke J. A., Hunter G. C., Rappaport W. D. Aspiration pneumonia following surgically placed feeding tubes. Am J Surg. 1995 Dec;170(6):564–567. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9610(99)80016-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Galindo-Ciocon D. J. Tube feeding: complications among the elderly. J Gerontol Nurs. 1993 Jun;19(6):17–22. doi: 10.3928/0098-9134-19930601-07. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Gerety M. B., Chiodo L. K., Kanten D. N., Tuley M. R., Cornell J. E. Medical treatment preferences of nursing home residents: relationship to function and concordance with surrogate decision-makers. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1993 Sep;41(9):953–960. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1993.tb06761.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Hassett J. M., Sunby C., Flint L. M. No elimination of aspiration pneumonia in neurologically disabled patients with feeding gastrostomy. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1988 Nov;167(5):383–388. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Kadakia S. C., Sullivan H. O., Starnes E. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy or jejunostomy and the incidence of aspiration in 79 patients. Am J Surg. 1992 Aug;164(2):114–118. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9610(05)80367-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Kaw M., Sekas G. Long-term follow-up of consequences of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes in nursing home patients. Dig Dis Sci. 1994 Apr;39(4):738–743. doi: 10.1007/BF02087416. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Kayser-Jones J. The use of nasogastric feeding tubes in nursing homes: patient, family and health care provider perspectives. Gerontologist. 1990 Aug;30(4):469–479. doi: 10.1093/geront/30.4.469. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Lazarus B. A., Murphy J. B., Culpepper L. Aspiration associated with long-term gastric versus jejunal feeding: a critical analysis of the literature. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1990 Jan;71(1):46–53. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Mitchell S. L., Kiely D. K., Lipsitz L. A. Does artificial enteral nutrition prolong the survival of institutionalized elders with chewing and swallowing problems? J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1998 May;53(3):M207–M213. doi: 10.1093/gerona/53a.3.m207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Mitchell S. L., Kiely D. K., Lipsitz L. A. The risk factors and impact on survival of feeding tube placement in nursing home residents with severe cognitive impairment. Arch Intern Med. 1997 Feb 10;157(3):327–332. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. O'Brien L. A., Siegert E. A., Grisso J. A., Maislin G. M., LaPann K., Evans L. K., Krotki K. P. Tube feeding preferences among nursing home residents. J Gen Intern Med. 1997 Jun;12(6):364–371. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1997.00061.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Ouslander J. G., Tymchuk A. J., Krynski M. D. Decisions about enteral tube feeding among the elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1993 Jan;41(1):70–77. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1993.tb05951.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Peck A., Cohen C. E., Mulvihill M. N. Long-term enteral feeding of aged demented nursing home patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1990 Nov;38(11):1195–1198. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1990.tb01498.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Quill T. E. Utilization of nasogastric feeding tubes in a group of chronically ill, elderly patients in a community hospital. Arch Intern Med. 1989 Sep;149(9):1937–1941. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Rabeneck L., Wray N. P., Petersen N. J. Long-term outcomes of patients receiving percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes. J Gen Intern Med. 1996 May;11(5):287–293. doi: 10.1007/BF02598270. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Smith D. G., Wigton R. S. Modeling decisions to use tube feeding in seriously ill patients. Arch Intern Med. 1987 Jul;147(7):1242–1245. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Von Preyss-Friedman S. M., Uhlmann R. F., Cain K. C. Physicians' attitudes toward tube feeding chronically ill nursing home patients. J Gen Intern Med. 1992 Jan-Feb;7(1):46–51. doi: 10.1007/BF02599102. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Watts D. T., Cassel C. K., Hickam D. H. Nurses' and physicians' attitudes toward tube-feeding decisions in long-term care. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1986 Aug;34(8):607–611. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1986.tb05767.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Weaver J. P., Odell P., Nelson C. Evaluation of the benefits of gastric tube feeding in an elderly population. Arch Fam Med. 1993 Sep;2(9):953–956. doi: 10.1001/archfami.2.9.953. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal are provided here courtesy of Canadian Medical Association

RESOURCES