Abstract
Medical ethics is the study of human values as they relate to the practice of medicine. Ethics intersects with gastroenterology primarily involving issues of gastric and intestinal artificial feeding at the end of life. Language imparts meaning. Gastric artificial feeding is not the same as eating. Recent data suggest that gastric artificial feeding does not prolong life in patients with dementia and dysphagia. Given the lack of documented benefit of gastrointestinal feeding in these patients, the literature has focused on selection of appropriate patients for this medical intervention. Ethical care involves compassion, communication, consultation, and collaboration in dealing with emotionally difficult circumstances.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References and Recommended Reading
Entries for ethics. http://dictionary.reference.com/ search?q=ethics. Accessed November 28, 2003.
Burck R: Feeding, withdrawing, and withholding: ethical perspectives. Nutr Clin Pract 1996, 11:243–253.
Lipman TO: The chicken soup paradigm and nutrition support: rethinking terminology. J Parenter Enter Nutr 2003, 27:93–94. This editorial argues for a change in terminology when discussing "nutrition support." Our current language equates nutrition support with eating, which it is not, either with respect to nutrient content or methods of delivery. By forcing us to rethink terminology, we can come to grips with the fact that artificial feeding involves invasive medical procedures associated with risk, and that benefit needs to be established, not assumed.
Finocchiaro C, Galletti R, Rovera G, et al.: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a long-term follow-up. Nutrition 1997, 13:520–523.
Frant MD, Rudberg MA, Brody JA: Gastrostomy placement and mortality among hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries. JAMA 1998, 279:1973–1978.
Ha L, Hauge T: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) for enteral nutrition in patients with stroke. Scand J Gastroenterol 2003, 38:962–966.
Kobayashi K, Cooper GS, Chak A, et al.: A prospective evaluation of outcome in patients referred for PEG placement. Gastrointest Endosc 2002, 55:500–506.
Fisman DN, Levy AR, Gifford DR, Tamblyn R: Survival after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy among older residents of Quebec. J Am Geriatr Soc 1999, 47:349–353.
Cortez-Pinto H, Pinto Correia A, Camilo ME, et al.: Long-term management of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy by a nutritional support team. Clin Nutr 2002, 21:27–31.
Sanders DS, Carter MJ, D’Silva J, et al.: Survival analysis in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy feeding: a worse outcome in patients with dementia. Am J Gastroenterol 2000, 95:1472–1475.
Fox MR, Harris AW: An assessment of open access referral for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in a district general hospital. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2002, 14:1245–1249.
Ganzini L, Goy ER, Miller LL, et al.: Nurses’ experiences with hospice patients who refuse food and fluids to hasten death. N Engl J Med 2003, 349:359–365.
Jacobs S: Death by voluntary dehydration—what the caregivers say. N Engl J Med 2003, 349:325–326.
Abuksis G, Mor M, Segal N, et al.: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: high mortality rates in hospitalized patients. Am J Gastroenterol 2000, 95:128–132.
Rudberg MA, Egleston BL, Grand MD, Brody JA: Effectiveness of feeding tubes in nursing home residents with swallowing disorders. JPEN J Parenter Enter Nutr 2000, 24:97–102.
Mitchell SL, Kiely DK, Lipsitz LA: Does artificial enteral nutrition prolong the survival of institutionalized elders with swallowing problems? J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 1998, 53:M207-M213.
Mitchell SL, Kiely DK, Lipsitz LA: The risk factors and impact on survival of feeding tube placement in nursing home residents with severe cognitive impairment. Arch Intern Med 1997, 157:327–332.
Meier DE, Ahronheim JC, Morris J, et al.: High short-term mortality in hospitalized patients with advanced dementia: lack of benefit of tube feeding. Arch Intern Med 2001, 161:594–599.
Murphy LM, Lipman TO: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy does not prolong survival in patients with dementia. Arch Intern Med 2003, 163:1351–1353. In this study no difference in survival was shown between demented patients who received a percutaneous gastrostomy tube and a similar cohort of demented patients who were offered gastrostomy artificial feeding but had surrogate refusal. The data are retrospective, but a true randomized, controlled trial may never be done.
Finucane TE, Christmas C, Travis K: Tube feeding in patients with advanced dementia: a review of the evidence. JAMA 1999, 282:1365–1370. This classic paper argues that there is no documentation of any form of benefit from artificial feeding in patients with dementia and swallowing disorders. It is must reading for any clinician involved with artificial feeding.
Brett AS, Rosenberg JC: The adequacy of informed consent for placement of gastrostomy tubes. Arch Intern Med 2001, 161:745–748.
Ladas SD, Triantafyllou K, Liappas, et al.: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: adequacy and quality of information given to decision-makers. Digest Dis 2002, 20:289–292.
Sanders DS, Carter MJ, D’Silva J, et al.: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a prospective audit of the impact of guidelines in two district general hospitals in the United Kingdom. Am J Gastroenterology 2002, 97:2239–2245.
Callahan CM, Buchanan NN, Stump TE: Healthcare costs associated with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy among older adults in a defined community. J Am Geriatr Soc 2001, 49:1525–1529.
Odom SR, Barone JE, Docimo S, et al.: Emergency department visits by demented patients with malfunctioning feeding tubes. Surg Endosc 2003, 17:651–656.
Mitchell SL, Buchanan JL, Littlehale S, Hamel MB: Tube-feeding versus hand-feeding nursing home residents with advanced dementia: a cost comparison. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2003, 4:27–33.
Stein J: The ethics of advance directives: a rehabilitation perspective. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2003, 82:152–157.
Schneiderman LJ, Gilmer T, Teetzel HD, et al.: Effect of ethics consultations on nonbeneficial life-sustaining treatments in the intensive care setting: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2003, 290:1166–1172.
Lo B: Answers and questions about ethics consultations. JAMA 2003, 290:1208–1210.
Jansen LA, Sulmasy DP: Sedation, alimentation, hydration, and equivocation: careful conversation about care at the end of life. Ann Intern Med 2002, 136:845–849.
Prendergast TJ, Puntillo KA: Withdrawal of life support: intensive caring at the end of life. JAMA 2002, 288:2732–2740.
Brett AS, Jersild P: ’Inappropriate’ treatment near the end of life: conflict between religious convictions and clinical judgment. Arch Intern Med 2003, 163:1645–1649.
Kunin J: Withholding artificial feeding from the severely demented: merciful or immoral? Contrasts between secular and Jewish perspectives. J Med Ethics 2003, 29:208–212.
Niv Y, Abukis G: Indications for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy insertion: ethical aspects. Dig Dis 2002, 20:253–256.
Barrocas A, Yarbrough G, Becnel PA III, Nelson JE: Ethical and legal issues in nutrition support of the geriatric patient: the can, should, and must of nutrition support. Nutr Clin Pract 2003, 18:37–47.
Angus F, Burakoff R: The percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube: medical and ethical issues in placement. Am J Gastroenterol 2003, 98:272–277.
Kruse A, Misiewicz JJ, Rokkas T, et al.: Recommendations of the ESGE workshop on the ethics of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement for nutritional support: first European symposium on ethics in gastroenterology and digestive endoscopy. Endoscopy 2003, 35:778–780.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lipman, T.O. Ethics and gastrointestinal artificial feeding. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 6, 314–319 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-004-0084-4
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-004-0084-4