Nasogastric tube feeding under physical restraint of children and young people with mental disorders: a comprehensive audit and case series across paediatric wards in England
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To estimate the number of patients on paediatric wards in England who received nasogastric tube (NGT) feeding under physical restraint from April 2022 to March 2023, identify the demographics and clinical characteristics of these patients, and which personnel facilitated the restraint. Design Audit and anonymous case series Setting Paediatric wards in England. Patients Children and young people receiving this intervention in a 1-year period. Outcome measures An online survey was sent to all paediatric wards in England, with the option of submitting anonymous case studies. Results 136/143 (95.1%) acute paediatric units responded. 144 young people received this intervention across 55 (38.5%) paediatric units. The predominant diagnosis was anorexia nervosa (64.5%), age range 9–18 years (M=14.2, SD=2.1). The duration of NGT feeding under restraint ranged from 1 to 425 days, (M = 60.2, SD=80.4). Numerous personnel facilitated the restraints, including mental health nurses, paediatric nurses, security staff, healthcare assistants and parents/carers. Conclusion NGT feeding under restraint is a relatively common intervention in acute paediatric units in England. Understanding the demographics of those receiving this intervention may highlight where additional support is needed. Further research is needed to understand when this intervention transitions from a lifesaving intervention to ongoing management.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".