Assessing the appropriateness of parenteral nutrition use in hospitalized patients. A comparison on parenteral nutrition bag prescription in different wards and nutritional outcomes.

PURPOSE: Our aim is to assess parenteral nutrition (PN) bag prescription in hospitalized patients and evaluate clinical outcomes linked to PN therapy. METHODS: We performed an observational longitudinal retrospective study on PN prescription in a General Public Hospital in Turin, Italy, on ninety-five patients receiving PN prescribed by the Nutrition Support Team (NST). We described patients' demography and assessed nutritional outcomes, as well as PN bag prescription in different wards. Medians were calculated for several clinical parameters before and after PN therapy. A z-test for proportions has been performed to better understand the impact of various conditions on clinical outcomes and to compare differences between administered nutrients and required amounts. RESULTS: The NST resulted responsible for only 18% of bags prescribed in the geriatrics ward and for 48% in the surgery wards. PN was not able to fulfill nutritional requirements resulting in a median lack of 3.1 calories and 0.23 g of proteins per kilogram of reference body weight per day. Despite this, PN therapy was able to improve total blood proteins and calcium blood levels in our cohort. The NST changed the prescription in 55.8% of the pre-existing PN regimens. CONCLUSIONS: More strict adherence to guidelines is needed in order to maximize effectiveness of PN and observe a positive impact on clinical parameters.

[The assessment of the effectiveness of long vs standard-length catheters in reducing complications: a randomized controlled trial]. / Valutazione dell'efficacia dei dispositivi venosi periferici a cannula lunga vs quelli di lunghezza standard nella riduzione delle complicanze: studio clinico randomizzato controllato.

INTRODUCTION: From 30 to 80% of hospitalized patients is inserted a peripheral venous catheter (PVC). The PVC may be associated to several infective and non infective complications. AIMS: To assess whether a long-length vs standard-length PCV reduces the incidence of CRCs; to assess the patients' preferences and costs. METHODS: Randomized clinical trial on 211 patients (339 cannulas) admitted to an emergency medical and surgical wards. Patients were included if >18 years and prescribed a PVC. After the randomization the PVC were inspected daily, until removal. RESULTS: 186 complications occurred with the standard CVPs vs 16 with the midline, per 1000 catheter days; 47 phlebitis were observed in patients with standard PVCs vs none in those with midline; also infiltrations (66 vs 2 per 1000 catheter days), asymptomatic thromboses (34 vs 7 per 1000 catheter days), occlusions and accidental removals were greatly reduced. The higher cost of midline is counterbalanced by the complications prevented. In addition midline patients referred less limitations (96% vs 50.7%) and an higher satisfaction (91.9% vs 53.7%). CONCLUSIONS: The midline catheters radically reduce PVC associated complications, are preferred by patients and the higher costs should be weighted against the complications avoided.