Background Many healthcare facilities and providers prohibit blenderized tube feeding (BTF) for patients who request it due to concerns of high microbial load. The current project compared microbial loads of a standard ready‐to‐feed polymeric commercial formula (CF), a BTF made using baby food (BTF‐BF), and a BTF prepared from blending whole food (BTF‐WF), following food safety standards expected of U.S. hospitals. Methods Three tube‐feeding formulas (CF, BTF‐BF, BTF‐WF) were prepared in a U.S. hospital and delivered in vitro to an unoccupied patient room. Samples were collected at zero hour, 2 hours, and 4 hours and compared for growth of aerobic microorganisms, Staphylococus aureus, coliforms, and Escherichia coli. The experiment was conducted in triplicate, 1 week apart. Results No S. aureus or coliform/E. coli were detected at any time point following preparation, and total bacterial count was well below acceptable limits. All 3 feeding formulas at zero hour, 2 hours, and 4 hours for each of the 3 sampling dates were acceptable for human consumption. Conclusion Judicious BTF recipe selection and adherence to safe food handling provide a safe feeding substrate equivalent to CF in the hospital setting. Due to increased use and interest in BTF by patients and their caregivers, healthcare facilities may need to reexamine their policies prohibiting BTF use.

Interest in BFGT is largely parent-driven or explored as an option for children with tube feeding intolerance. Almost 80% of RDs using this feeding substrate report overall positive outcomes, but 28% indicate they want more information on using BFGT in clinical practice.

A significant number of parents in this sample successfully provide full or partial BTF to their children but only half rely on HCPs for guidance. There is wide variability in BTF preparation and delivery. Parents who use or have interest in BTF need knowledgeable and supportive HCPs for guidance and follow-up due to the unique nutritional needs of this patient population. HCPs need to be prepared to screen families of tube fed children who are using BTF or are interested in this feeding alternative to CF. Healthcare facilities need to evaluate their enteral feeding policies to accommodate patients on BTF.

Background: The number of patients requiring home enteral nutrition (HEN) continues to increase. Many of these patients are interested in using blended food instead of, or in addition to, commercial enteral formula (CEF). Increased risk of food-borne illness is a concern of blenderized tube-feeding (BTF). This project assessed a standard procedure for minimizing bacterial growth of BTF prepared in the home setting. Methods: Fifty participants prepared BTF in their kitchens using a standard preparation procedure to minimize bacterial contamination. BTF was assessed for growth of aerobic microorganisms, Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, and coliforms at baseline, 24-hour, and 48-hour intervals after preparation for a total of 150 colony forming units (CFU) counts performed. Results: No sample had zero aerobic microbial counts; yet no substantial increase in microbial counts was observed during the 48 hours. At baseline and 24 hours, 5/50 (10%) had a CFU count of >10 4 , and at 48 hours, 6/50 (12%) exceeded 10 4 CFUs. Out of 150 CFU counts, 2 (1.3%) were just over 10 5 CFU/mL. Samples exceeding 10 4 CFU/mL were likely contaminated by common endospore-forming bacteria found in soil or by bacteria in milk that was close to its expiration date. Conclusion: In this study, 88% of the samples met the US Food Code criteria for safe food consumption; 10.7% met guidelines for marginal safety by other standards; and 1.3% slightly exceeded 10 5 CFUs. Established safe food-handling procedures can minimize bacterial contamination of BTF and consequently reduce risk of food-borne infection in HEN patients.

The use of BTF is primarily patient or caregiver driven. Blenderized tube feeding requires oversight by health care providers just as commercial formulas. Health care providers should be aware of the use of BTF and the effect it can have on different patient populations regarding content, cost, safety, and efficacy in the clinical and home settings.