What you think is not what they get: significant discrepancies between prescribed and administered doses of tube feeding.

Enteral tube feeding remains an indispensible strategy to treat disease-related malnutrition. In the present study we evaluated in clinical practice whether prescribed feeding volumes correspond with administered quantities and we highlight possible causes for discrepancies. During a 4-month observation period data from all patients fully depending on tube feeding (1.5-2.5 litres/d) were collected in a Dutch 900-bed academic hospital. The range for administered feeds to be adequate was set at 100 +/- 10% of the prescribed dose. Fifty-five patients (mean age 57 (SD 30) years) were included. Tube feeding was given continuously via pump (n 37) or drip (n 3), in portions (n 14) or by combined modes (n 1). Administered tube feeding amounts were significantly lower than prescribed in 40% of all patients (P < or = 0.001). The mean ratio of administered v. prescribed energy was 87 (SD 21) % (all modes), 85 (SD 24) % (pump), 94 (SD 12) % (portions) and 88.3 (SD 18.1) % (drip), respectively. The mean energy deficit amounted to 1089 kJ/d (range -7955 to +795). Only on intensive care unit wards did feeding administration meet the set goal. Feeding interruptions because of diagnostic or therapeutic procedures were the main reason for decreased intakes. Our findings show that many patients relying on tube feeding do not meet their nutritional goals during hospital stay. This problem can be addressed by adapting feeding schedules and the use of formulations with a higher energy density