Al-Mallah MH, Farah I, Al-Madani W The impact of nurse-led clinics on the mortality and morbidity of patients with cardiovascular diseases. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2016; 31:(1)89-95

Balogh B, Kovács T, Saxena AK. Complications in children with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement. World J Pediatr. 2019; 15:(1)12-16

Blumenstein I, Shastri YM, Stein J. Gastroenteric tube feeding: Techniques, problems and solutions. World J Gastroenterol. 2014; 20:(26)8505-8524

Chan RJ, Marx W, Bradford N Clinical and economic outcomes of nurse-led services in the ambulatory care setting: A systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2018; 81:61-80

Cyrany J, Rejchrt S, Kopacova M, Bures J. Buried bumper syndrome: A complication of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. World J Gastroenterol. 2016; 22:(2)618-627

El-Matary W. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in children. Can J Gastroenterol. 2008; 22:(12)993-998

Fröhlich T, Richter M, Carbon R, Barth B, Köhler H. Review article: percutanous endoscopic gastrostomy in infants and children. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2010; 31:(8)788-801

Godbole P, Margabanthu G, Crabbe DC Limitations and uses of gastrojejunal feeding tubes. Arch Dis Child. 2002; 86:(2)134-137

General Medical Council. Good medical practice. 2019. (accessed 7 April 2021)

Goring J, Lawson A, Godse A. Are PEGJs a risk factor for the buried bumper syndrome?. J Pediatr Surg. 2016; 51:(2)257-259

Hansen E, Qvist N, Rasmussen L, Ellebaek MB. Postoperative complications following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy are common in children. Acta Paediatr. 2017; 106:(7)1165-1169

Heuschkel RB, Gottrand F, Devarajan K ESPGHAN position paper on management of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in children and adolescents. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2015; 60:(1)131-141

Hucl T, Spicak J. Complications of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2016; 30:(5)769-781

Khattak IU, Kimber C, Kiely EM, Spitz L. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in paediatric practice: complications and outcome. J Pediatr Surg. 1998; 33:(1)67-72

Kwon RS, Banerjee S, Desilets D Enteral nutrition access devices. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010; 72:(2)236-248

Mathioudakis A, Rousalova I, Gagnat AA, Saad N, Hardavella G. How to keep good clinical records. Breathe (Sheff). 2016; 12:(4)369-373

Park JH, Rhie S, Jeong SJ. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in children. Korean J Pediatr. 2011; 54:(1)17-21

Pindard E, Marshall T, Neild P. PTU-096 5 year gastrostomy audit: the benefits of a nutrition nurse led service: Abstract PTU-096 Table 1. Gut. 2016; 65:A102.1-A102

10 years' review of buried bumpers: a potentially preventable serious problem in PEGs. (accessed 7 April 2021)

Randall S, Crawford T, Currie J, River J, Betihavas V. Impact of community based nurse-led clinics on patient outcomes, patient satisfaction, patient access and cost effectiveness: A systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2017; 73:24-33

Stewart CE, Mutalib M, Pradhan A, Bassett C, Drake D, Upadhyaya M. Short article: Buried bumper syndrome in children: incidence and risk factors. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017; 29:(2)181-184

Nurse-led service for children with gastrostomies: a 2-year review

22 April 2021
Volume 30 · Issue 8



Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding can provide long-term nutritional support for patients with a functional gastrointestinal system but insufficient oral intake. Some patients, however, may require jejunal feeding, which can be achieved using a PEG tube with jejunal extension (PEG-J). A previous review at a tertiary paediatric hospital revealed poor documentation and a high incidence of buried bumper syndrome (BBS) in children with gastrostomies. Subsequently, a nurse-led service for gastrostomy care was introduced.


To determine the impact of the nurse-led service.


Prospective review, at 1 year and 2 years, following either a PEG or PEG-J insertion. Patient records were reviewed and a telephone survey was conducted. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact test.


32 PEG and 6 PEG-J patients were included in this study. There was 100% documentation of provision of care instructions. Average satisfaction with the service was over 8/10. Incidence of BBS was 0% in the PEG group and 17% in the PEG-J group. Of those parents/carers surveyed, 74% wanted additional tube care support via SMS text message.


Introduction of a nurse-led service resulted in complete documentation of provision of care and sustained high levels of parental satisfaction. Future care should focus on utilising technological platforms.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding is a valuable option for patients with a functional gastrointestinal (GI) tract who require long-term nutritional support but have insufficient oral intake (Blumenstein et al, 2014). In addition, some patients may require jejunal tube feeding to provide postpyloric feeding, which can be achieved using a PEG tube with jejunal extension (PEG-J) (Fröhlich et al, 2010; Kwon et al, 2010).

Although commonly performed, PEG is a surgical procedure with high rates of complications up to 51.5% reported in paediatric populations (Khattak et al, 1998; El-Matary, 2008; Park et al, 2011; Hansen et al, 2017; Balogh et al, 2019). Minor complications include granuloma formation, wound infection, blocked tubes and dislodged tubes. Major complications include colonic fistula, necrotising fasciitis, bleeding, volvulus, tumour seeding and buried bumper syndrome (BBS) (El-Matary, 2008; Hucl and Spicak, 2016).

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting British Journal of Nursing and reading some of our peer-reviewed resources for nurses. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Limited access to clinical or professional articles

  • Unlimited access to the latest news, blogs and video content