Search

Background and Aim: Chronic intestinal failure requiring home parenteral nutrition (HPN) is a disabling condition that is best facilitated by a multidisciplinary approach to care. Variation in care has been identified as a key barrier to achieving quality of care for patients on HPN and requires appropriate strategies to help standardize management. Method(s): The Australasian Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (AuSPEN) assembled a multidisciplinary working group of 15 clinicians to develop a quality framework to assist with the standardization of HPN care in Australia. Obstacles to quality care specific to Australia were identified by consensus. Drafts of the framework documents were based on the available literature and refined by two Delphi rounds with the clinician work group, followed by a further two involving HPN consumers. The Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence was used to assess the strength of evidence underpinning each concept within the framework documents. Result(s): Quality indicators, standards of care, and position statements have been developed to progress the delivery of quality care to HPN patients. Conclusion(s): The quality framework proposed by AuSPEN is intended to provide a practical structure for clinical and organizational aspects of HPN service delivery to reduce variation in care and improve quality of care and represents the initial step towards development of a national model of care for HPN patients in Australia. While developed for implementation in Australia, the evidence-based framework also has relevance to the international HPN community.Copyright © 2019 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Chronic intestinal failure requiring home parenteral nutrition (HPN) is a disabling condition that is best facilitated by a multidisciplinary approach to care. Variation in care has been identified as a key barrier to achieving quality of care for patients on HPN and requires appropriate strategies to help standardize management. METHOD: The Australasian Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (AuSPEN) assembled a multidisciplinary working group of 15 clinicians to develop a quality framework to assist with the standardization of HPN care in Australia. Obstacles to quality care specific to Australia were identified by consensus. Drafts of the framework documents were based on the available literature and refined by two Delphi rounds with the clinician work group, followed by a further two involving HPN consumers. The Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence was used to assess the strength of evidence underpinning each concept within the framework documents. RESULTS: Quality indicators, standards of care, and position statements have been developed to progress the delivery of quality care to HPN patients. CONCLUSION: The quality framework proposed by AuSPEN is intended to provide a practical structure for clinical and organizational aspects of HPN service delivery to reduce variation in care and improve quality of care and represents the initial step towards development of a national model of care for HPN patients in Australia. While developed for implementation in Australia, the evidence-based framework also has relevance to the international HPN community.

Objective: Evidence based guidelines for home parenteral nutrition (HPN) were commissioned by the Australasian Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (AuSPEN) and developed by a multidisciplinary group. The guidelines make recommendations in four domains: patient selection, patient training, formulation and monitoring regimens, and preventing and managing complications. Method(s): The Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation guideline process was used to focus questions and identify evidence by systematic literature reviews of meta-analyses and randomized control trials in the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, and Cinahl to mid-2007. Where no randomized control trial evidence was found, the search was broadened to observational studies and expert opinion from related national and international guidelines as assessed by a validated appraisal process. Result(s): Selection of patients must assess individual risk/benefit and medical ethics. Patient training should be undertaken within a structured framework. Access devices should be selected for lowest risk of complications, including occlusion, sepsis, and breakage and be managed by early diagnosis and treatment. HPN should be formulated according to individual patient requirements by professionals with relevant skills and training. Pumps and ancillary products should conform to quality standards. Other intravenous medications may be prescribed provided these are reviewed for compatibility and effects on metabolic status. Conclusion(s): Overall there is a lack of randomized control trials to provide high-quality evidence-based guidance but graded recommendations can be made. Multidisciplinary teams in centers with HPN management expertise are required for optimal care. This guideline should improve outcomes and quality of life for HPN patients in Australia and New Zealand. © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.