Search

Purpose: Parenteral nutrition (PN) is an established therapy when oral/enteral feeding is not sufficient or is contraindicated, but nevertheless PN remains a complex, high-alert medication that is susceptible to errors that may affect patient safety. Over time, considerable progress has been made to make PN practices safer. The purpose of this article is to address ongoing challenges to improve the PN use process from prescription to administration and monitoring, and to outline practical aspects fostering the safety, quality, and cost-effectiveness of PN, as discussed at the International Safety and Quality of PN Summit., Summary: Opportunities to improve the PN use process in clinical practice include the promotion of inter-disciplinary communication, vigilant surveillance for complications, staff education to increase competency, and more consistent use of advanced technologies that allow automated safety checks throughout the PN process. Topics covered include considerations on PN formulations, including the value of intravenous lipid emulsions (ILEs), trends in compounding PN, the current and future role of market-authorized multi-chamber PN bags containing all 3 macronutrients (amino acids, glucose/dextrose, and ILE) in the United States and in Europe, and strategies to cope with the increasing global problem of PN product shortages., Conclusion: This review outlines potential strategies to use in clinical practice to overcome ongoing challenges throughout the PN use process, and ultimately promote PN patient safety., (© American Society of Health-System Pharmacists 2024.)

Background: Omega-3 (ω-3) fatty acid (FA)-containing parenteral nutrition (PN) is associated with significant improvements in patient outcomes compared with standard PN regimens without ω-3 FA lipid emulsions. Here, we evaluate the impact of ω-3 FA-containing PN versus standard PN on clinical outcomes and costs in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients using a meta-analysis and subsequent cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of a hospital operating in five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, UK) and the US., Methods: We present a pharmacoeconomic simulation based on a systematic literature review with meta-analysis. Clinical outcomes and costs comparing ω-3 FA-containing PN with standard PN were evaluated in adult ICU patients eligible to receive PN covering at least 70% of their total energy requirements and in the subgroup of critically ill ICU patients (mean ICU stay > 48 h). The meta-analysis with the co-primary outcomes of infection rate and mortality rate was based on randomized controlled trial data retrieved via a systematic literature review; resulting efficacy data were subsequently employed in country-specific cost-effectiveness analyses., Results: In adult ICU patients, ω-3 FA-containing PN versus standard PN was associated with significant reductions in the relative risk (RR) of infection (RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.45, 0.86; p = 0.004), hospital length of stay (HLOS) (- 3.05 days; 95% CI - 5.03, - 1.07; p = 0.003) and ICU length of stay (LOS) (- 1.89 days; 95% CI - 3.33, - 0.45; p = 0.01). In critically ill ICU patients, ω-3 FA-containing PN was associated with similar reductions in infection rates (RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.46, 0.94; p = 0.02), HLOS (- 3.98 days; 95% CI - 6.90, - 1.06; p = 0.008) and ICU LOS (- 2.14 days; 95% CI - 3.89, - 0.40; p = 0.02). Overall hospital episode costs were reduced in all six countries using ω-3 FA-containing PN compared to standard PN, ranging from €-3156 ± 1404 in Spain to €-9586 ± 4157 in the US., Conclusion: These analyses demonstrate that ω-3 FA-containing PN is associated with statistically and clinically significant improvement in patient outcomes. Its use is also predicted to yield cost savings compared to standard PN, rendering ω-3 FA-containing PN an attractive cost-saving alternative across different health care systems., Study Registration: PROSPERO CRD42019129311.