Consensus Recommendations for Optimizing Electronic Health Records for Nutrition Care.

Provision of nutrition care is vital to the health and well-being of any patient who enters the health care system, whether in the ambulatory, inpatient, or long-term care setting. Interdisciplinary professionals-nurses, physicians, advanced practice providers, pharmacists, and dietitians-identify and treat nutrition problems or clinical conditions in each of these health care settings. The documentation of nutrition care in a structured format from screening and assessment to discharge allows communication of the nutrition treatment plans. The goal of this document is to provide recommendations to clinicians for working with an organization's Information Systems department to create tools for documentation of nutrition care in the electronic health record. These recommendations can also serve as guidance for health care organizations choosing and implementing health care software.

Consensus Recommendations for Optimizing Electronic Health Records for Nutrition Care.

Provision of nutrition care is vital to the health and well-being of any patient who enters the health care system, whether in the ambulatory, inpatient, or long-term care setting. Interdisciplinary professionals-nurses, physicians, advanced practice providers, pharmacists, and dietitians-identify and treat nutrition problems or clinical conditions in each of these health care settings. The documentation of nutrition care in a structured format from screening and assessment to discharge allows communication of the nutrition treatment plans. The goal of this document is to provide recommendations to clinicians for working with an organization's Information Systems department to create tools for documentation of nutrition care in the electronic health record. These recommendations can also serve as guidance for health care organizations choosing and implementing health care software.

Follow-Up Survey on Functionality of Nutrition Documentation and Ordering Nutrition Therapy in Currently Available Electronic Health Record Systems.

BACKGROUND: This is a follow-up survey to reassess the safety and efficacy of nutrition content in the available electronic health record (EHR) systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Members of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (A.S.P.E.N.), American Society for Nutrition, and the Academy for Nutrition and Dietetics were asked to participate in an online survey. The survey included questions from a 2012 EHR survey on the safety and efficacy in 5 nutrition content areas as well as questions from previous 2003 and 2011 A.S.P.E.N. parenteral nutrition (PN) surveys. RESULTS: Percent of respondents using an EHR and using the EHR for less than 1 year increased between 2012 and 2014 (86%-94%, P < .05; 11%-16%, P < .05, respectively). However, there was no improvement in the safety and efficacy of the 5 nutrition content areas, with a significant decrease in 2 of these areas, ordering oral nutrition supplements and ordering PN. The top-rated EHR vendors had a higher average favorable response rate in regards to safety and efficacy in the nutrition content areas but even the top-rated EHR vendor had only a 60% average in favorable responses. Reported use of electronic PN ordering and a direct interface between the EHR and the automated compounding device (ACD) significantly increased from 2003 to 2011 to 2014 (29% to 33% to 63% and 16% to 19% to 28%, respectively, P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: This is a call to action to nutrition support clinicians, societies, and organizations to proactively be involved in initiatives to educate clinicians and collaborate with EHR vendors to enhance the EHR systems to improve the safety and efficacy of providing nutrition therapy in hospitalized patients.

A Call to Action to Bring Safer Parenteral Micronutrient Products to the U.S. Market.

The American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (A.S.P.E.N.) started an intensive review of commercially available parenteral vitamin and trace element (TE) products in 2009. The chief findings were that adult multi-TE products currently available in the United States (U.S.) provide potentially toxic amounts of manganese, copper, and chromium, and neonatal/pediatric multi-TE products provide potentially toxic amounts of manganese and chromium. The multivitamin products appeared safe and effective; however, a separate parenteral vitamin D product is needed for those patients on standard therapy who continue to be vitamin D depleted and are unresponsive to oral supplements. The review process also extended to parenteral choline and carnitine. Although choline and carnitine are not technically vitamins or trace elements, choline is an essential nutrient in all age groups, and carnitine is an essential nutrient in infants, according to the Food and Nutrition Board of the Institute of Medicine. A parenteral choline product needs to be developed and available. Efforts are currently under way to engage the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the parenteral nutrient industry so A.S.P.E.N.'s recommendations can become a commercial reality.

A.S.P.E.N. position paper: recommendations for changes in commercially available parenteral multivitamin and multi-trace element products.

The parenteral multivitamin preparations that are commercially available in the United States (U.S.) meet the requirements for most patients who receive parenteral nutrition (PN). However, a separate parenteral vitamin D preparation (cholecalciferol or ergocalciferol) should be made available for treatment of patients with vitamin D deficiency unresponsive to oral vitamin D supplementation. Carnitine is commercially available and should be routinely added to neonatal PN formulations. Choline should also be routinely added to adult and pediatric PN formulations; however, a commercially available parenteral product needs to be developed. The parenteral multi-trace element (TE) preparations that are commercially available in the U.S. require significant modifications. Single-entity trace element products can be used to meet individual patient needs when the multiple-element products are inappropriate (see Summary/A.S.P.E.N. Recommendations section for details of these proposed modifications).

A.S.P.E.N. position paper: Clinical role for alternative intravenous fat emulsions.

The currently available, standard soybean oil (SO)-based intravenous fat emulsions (IVFEs) meet the needs of most parenteral nutrition (PN) patients. There are alternative oil-based fat emulsions, such as medium-chain triglycerides (MCTs), olive oils (OOs), and fish oils (FOs), that, based on extensive usage in Europe, have an equivalent safety profile to SO. These alternative IVFEs are metabolized via different pathways, which may lead to less proinflammatory effects and less immune suppression. These alternative oil-based IVFEs are not currently available in the United States. Many patients who require IVFEs are already in a compromised state. Such patients could potentially have better clinical outcomes when receiving one of the alternative IVFEs to diminish the intake of the potentially proinflammatory ω-6 fatty acid-linoleic acid-which comprises more than 50% of the fatty acid profile in SO. Further research is needed on these alternative oil-based IVFEs to identify which IVFE oils or which combination of oils may be most clinically useful for specific patient populations.

Retrospective review of the preoperative biliary and gastrointestinal evaluation for gastric bypass surgery.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to analyze the frequency and results of preoperative biliary and gastrointestinal (GI) evaluation of patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). METHODS: Retrospective review of the preoperative evaluation of 144 consecutive RYGB patients. RESULTS: Cholecystectomy had already been performed in 43 (30%) patients; 22% of those patients with an intact gallbladder had cholelithiasis. Ten patients (7%) had an upper GI x-ray (UGI), and 94 patients (65%) had an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). Abnormalities were found in 40% of the UGIs and 84% of the EGDs. A total of 96 patients (67%) were tested for Helicobacter pylori; 11% were positive. Twenty-one patients (15%) underwent preoperative colonoscopy; 48% were abnormal, but most of the abnormalities were not clinically significant. Three patients had barium enema x-ray, which was normal in all cases. CONCLUSIONS: The preoperative biliary and GI evaluation of bariatric surgery patients should include a routine ultrasound of the gallbladder. Routine preoperative EGD will detect a significant number of abnormalities that should be treated, but should rarely alter the bariatric surgical procedure or result in denial of bariatric surgery. Many abnormalities will be asymptomatic. Patients should be routinely screened for H. pylori and, if positive, treated before bariatric surgery. Lower GI evaluation should be performed selectively based on the patient's symptoms, physical findings, and guidelines for colorectal cancer and polyp screening.

The Use of Serum Albumin as a Prognostic or Nutritional Marker and The Pros and Cons of IV Albumin Therapy.

Serum albumin is a poor nutritional marker, but it is a good prognostic marker correlating with morbidity and mortality. However, IV albumin administration in hypoalbuminemic patients does not decrease tube feeding-associated diarrhea or intolerance, nor does it improve clinical outcome, so it is not cost-effective. In selected situations, colloid solutions may be helpful; however, nonprotein colloids are preferred and rarely is IV albumin indicated.