Infection risk and cost-effectiveness of commercial bags or glass bottles for total parenteral nutrition

Practical handling of AIO admixtures - Guidelines on Parenteral Nutrition, Chapter 10

All-in-one admixtures (AIO-admixtures) provide safe, effective and low-risk PN (parenteral nutrition) for practically all indications and applications. Water, energy (carbohydrates and lipids), amino acids, vitamins and trace elements are infused together with PN either as industrially-manufactured AIO admixtures provided as two- or three-chamber bags (shelf life usually more than 12 months) completed with electrolytes and micronutrients where appropriate or as individually compounded ready-to-use AIO admixtures (compounding, usually prepared by a pharmacy on either a daily or weekly basis and stored at 2–8°C). Physico-chemical and microbial stability of an AIO admixture is essential for the safety and effectiveness of patient-specific PN, and its assurance requires specialist pharmaceutical knowledge. The stability should be documented for an application period of 24 (–48) hours. It is advisable to offer a limited selection of different PN regimes in each hospital. For reasons of drug and medication safety, PN admixtures prepared for individual patients must be correctly labelled and specifications for storage conditions must also be followed during transport. Monitoring is required where applicable. Micronutrients are usually administered separately to AIO admixtures. In case compatibility and stability have been well documented trace elements and/or combination preparations including water-soluble or water-soluble/fat soluble vitamin supplements can be added to PN admixtures under strict aseptic conditions. AIO admixtures are usually not used as vehicles for drugs (incompatibilities).

ESPEN Guidelines on Parenteral Nutrition: intensive care

Nutritional support in the intensive care setting represents a challenge but it is fortunate that its delivery and monitoring can be followed closely. Enteral feeding guidelines have shown the evidence in favor of early delivery and the efficacy of use of the gastrointestinal tract. Parenteral nutrition (PN) represents an alternative or additional approach when other routes are not succeeding (not necessarily having failed completely) or when it is not possible or would be unsafe to use other routes. The main goal of PN is to deliver a nutrient mixture closely related to requirements safely and to avoid complications. This nutritional approach has been a subject of debate over the past decades. PN carries the considerable risk of overfeeding which can be as deleterious as underfeeding. Therefore the authors will present not only the evidence available regarding the indications for PN, its implementation, the energy required, its possible complementary use with enteral nutrition, but also the relative importance of the macro- and micronutrients in the formula proposed for the critically ill patient. Data on long-term survival (expressed as 6 month survival) will also be considered a relevant outcome measure. Since there is a wide range of interpretations regarding the content of PN and great diversity in its practice, our guidance will necessarily reflect these different views. The papers available are very heterogeneous in quality and methodology (amount of calories, nutrients, proportion of nutrients, patients, etc.) and the different meta-analyses have not always taken this into account. Use of exclusive PN or complementary PN can lead to confusion, calorie targets are rarely achieved, and different nutrients continue to be used in different proportions. The present guidelines are the result of the analysis of the available literature, and acknowledging these limitations, our recommendations are intentionally largely expressed as expert opinions.

Economic evaluation and catheter-related bloodstream infections

Catheter-related bloodstream infections are a serious problem. Many interventions reduce risk, and some have been evaluated in cost-effectiveness studies. We review the usefulness and quality of these economic studies. Evidence is incomplete, and data required to inform a coherent policy are missing. The cost-effectiveness studies are characterized by a lack of transparency, short time-horizons, and narrow economic perspectives. Data quality is low for some important model parameters. Authors of future economic evaluations should aim to model the complete policy and not just single interventions. They should be rigorous in developing the structure of the economic model, include all relevant economic outcomes, use a systematic approach for selecting data sources for model parameters, and propagate the effect of uncertainty in model parameters on conclusions. This will inform future data collection and improve our understanding of the economics of preventing these infections.

A systematic audit of economic evidence linking nosocomial infections and infection control interventions: 1990-2000

BACKGROUND

Nosocomial infections (NIs) are a serious patient safety issue. Infection control personnel are responsible for implementing interventions to reduce this risk. The purpose of this systematic review was to audit the published economic evidence of the attributable cost of NIs and interventions conducted by infection control professionals and to evaluate the methods used. Economic evaluation methodology and recommendations for standardization are reviewed.

METHODS

A search of MEDLINE and HealthSTAR with medical subject headings or text words "nosocomial infections," "infection control," or "hospital acquired infections" cross-referenced with "costs," "cost analysis," "economics," or "cost-effectiveness analysis" was conducted. Published review articles were also searched. Inclusion criteria included articles published between 1990 and 2000 that contained an abstract and original cost estimate and were written in English. Results were standardized into a common currency.

RESULTS

Fifty-five studies were eligible. Approximately one quarter examined NIs in intensive care patients (n = 13). Most studies were conducted from the hospital perspective (n = 48). The costs attributable to bloodstream (mean = $38,703) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections (mean = $35,367) were the largest.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased standardization and rigor are needed. Clinicians should partner with economists and policy analysts to expand and improve the economic evidence available to reduce hospital complications such as NI and other adverse patient/staff outcomes.