Aim: The aim of this systematic review was to compare the benefits and harms of nasogastric and oral-based refeeding on the quality of care, including effectiveness, safety, and patient experience, for patients hospitalised with an eating disorder.
Methods: A systematic search for studies measuring comparative data between nasogastric and oral refeeding methods was conducted in August 2021. Title and abstracts and remaining full texts were screened by both authors. Risk of bias was evaluated using the PEDro scale, and overall quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation narrative synthesis.
Results: Seven studies (one randomised controlled trial, five non-randomised studies of interventions, and one qualitative study) with 917 participants were included. There was low certainty evidence that nasogastric refeeding resulted in no difference or a small increase in weekly weight gain, and moderate certainty of greater total weight gain, and very low certainty of increased length of stay compared to oral refeeding. There was no difference or a small increase in discharge weight and body mass index with nasogastric refeeding compared to oral refeeding. No serious adverse events were reported.
Conclusion: Patients selected for nasogastric refeeding have a longer duration of illness and lower admission weight, making it difficult to determine which refeeding approach is superior. However, the lack of clear difference in weekly weight gain and the lack of reported harms suggests that other factors such as the normalisation of eating behaviour may be taken into account when choosing the most appropriate refeeding method.
Keywords: anorexia nervosa; eating disorders; enteral feeding; nasogastric feeding; oral feeding.
© 2022 The Authors. Nutrition & Dietetics published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Dietitians Australia.