Performance and applicability of a first generation single-use duodenoscope: a single-center cohort study.

Background: Despite the standardization and optimization of disinfection protocols, duodenoscope-related infections (DRIs) remain an emerging threat for patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Single-use duodenoscopes could represent a potential alternative avenue to circumvent the problem of reprocessing and thus risk of exogenous patient-to-patient transmission. The aim of our study was to test the feasibility and technical success rate of a recently made available single-use duodenoscope. Methods: We carried out a thorough and standardized evaluation of the usability, performance and safety of a recently developed single-use duodenoscope in 52 consecutive patients scheduled for ERCP in a single center. Outcomes included performance ratings of the single-use duodenoscopes, adverse events (assessed at 3 days and 1 week), and crossover rate to a reusable duodenoscope. Results: The ERCP completion rate with a single-use duodenoscope was 90.4%, rising to 94.2% after crossover to reusable duodenoscope. The mean American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) grade was 2.7, with 27 procedures (51.9%) considered as advanced level complexity (ASGE grade 3 & 4). Performance rating found that 94% of the therapeutic treatments were comparable to those using a traditional reusable duodenoscope. Overall satisfaction amounted to 80%. No major adverse events were attributable to the single-use endoscope. Conclusions: Single-use duodenoscopes can provide an alternative to avoid the intensive and often inconsistent results of cleaning and disinfection procedures. We confirmed the feasibility, adequate performance characteristics and safety of a recently developed first-generation single-use duodenoscope over a broad range of ERCP procedures, in terms of both indication and complexity.

Outcome Indicators for Home Parenteral Nutrition Care: Point of View From Adult Patients With Benign Disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients receiving home parenteral nutrition (HPN) deserve a high-quality and patient-centered care. Patient-centered care can be delivered only if the patient's priorities and concerns are known. Therefore, the aim is to identify the top 3 most important outcome indicators according to patients' perspectives and the differences between several centers, HPN regimen, and HPN experience. METHODS: A questionnaire, based on previously developed outcome indicators, was translated into the mother tongue using forward-backward translation and distributed to adult HPN patients with benign disease in March 2013. To identify differences, a Kruskal-Wallis or Mann-Whitney test was performed with GraphPad Prism (significance level <.05) when applicable. RESULTS: Nine centers over 8 countries (300 patients) participated. The top 3 outcome indicators for patients were (1) incidence of catheter-related infection (CRI), (2) survival, and (3) quality of life (QoL). Between the participating centers, significant differences on rating were found for 5 outcome indicators (catheter obstruction, .015; weight, .002; energy, .010; fear, <.001; and independence, .010). The independence outcome indicator (.050) was considered less important for experienced (>2 years HPN) vs less experienced patients. For this outcome indicator, patients' view also differed significantly based on number of HPN days per week (.0103). CONCLUSION: A cohort of HPN patients identified incidence of CRI, survival, and QoL as the most important outcome indicators for their care; however, there were significant differences between the participating centers. For one outcome indicator (independence), there were significant differences based on experience and regimen.

Identifying patient-centered quality indicators for the care of adult home parenteral nutrition (HPN) patients.

BACKGROUND: Previous qualitative research, aimed at eliciting the experiences and views of home parenteral nutrition (HPN) patients in daily life, revealed little information on HPN care. However, to perform patient-centered care, it is important to understand what "quality of care" means for adult HPN patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify quality indicators through patients' perspectives. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In-depth, face-to-face, semistructured interviews were conducted between June and November 2011 with adult patients who recently started HPN. Patients were selected by purposive sampling. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using a framework approach. Nvivo 9.0 software was used for managing transcripts. RESULTS: Twelve adult patients (7F/5M) were interviewed. At the time of the interview, median HPN experience was 59 days. Two structure, 31 process, and 9 outcome indicators were identified. The majority of process indicators are related to the home nurse, indicating the important role of these healthcare professionals in HPN care. In addition, all interviewees reported communication as an essential aspect of the complex care pathway. The identified outcome indicators are comparable with the indicators that were previously developed by an expert panel. For example, improvement in quality of life during HPN treatment and incidence of catheter-related infections were identified by both groups. CONCLUSION: Interviews with HPN patients revealed an interesting set of indicators that can be used to perform, evaluate, or improve current HPN care and are a starting point for a more patient-centered approach.

Epidemiology of catheter-related infections in adult patients receiving home parenteral nutrition: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Catheter-related infection (CRI) is the most common and serious complication for adult patients receiving home parenteral nutrition (HPN). Our aim is to provide epidemiological data on infection incidence, infecting pathogens and contributing risk factors. METHODS: Four electronic databases (Embase, Medline, IPA, CINAHL) were screened for eligible studies published between 1970 and March 2012. Methodological quality was evaluated and terminology/definitions were re-categorized. RESULTS: Thirty-nine studies were included. Extensive variability was observed in terminology/definitions as well as in expression of CRI rate. After correct interpretation of definitions, overall catheter-related bloodstream infection rate (CRBSI) ranged between 0.38 and 4.58 episodes/1000 catheter days (median 1.31). Gram-positive bacteria of human skin flora caused more than half of infections. An analysis of the reported risk factors showed that the origin of a CRBSI is often multifactorial. The risk factors were related to the patient, the venous access device, the education, HPN therapy and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This review on CRI in adult HPN patients revealed that included studies are of low quality and used poorly described risk factors and different definitions. The human skin flora caused most of infections; therefore, hand hygiene and training remain essential.

Quality of care for cancer patients on home parenteral nutrition: development of key interventions and outcome indicators using a two-round Delphi approach.

PURPOSE: Clear recommendations on how to guide patients with cancer on home parenteral nutrition (HPN) are lacking as the use of HPN in this population remains a controversial issue. Therefore, the aims of this study were to rank treatment recommendations and main outcome indicators to ensure high-quality care and to indicate differences in care concerning benign versus malignant patients. METHODS: Treatment recommendations, identified from published guidelines, were used as a starting point for a two-round Delphi approach. Comments and additional interventions proposed in the first round were reevaluated in the second round. Ordinal logistic regression with SPSS 2.0 was used to identify differences in care concerning benign versus malignant patients. RESULTS: Twenty-seven experts from five European countries completed two Delphi rounds. After the second Delphi round, the top three most important outcome indicators were (1) quality of life (QoL), (2) incidence of hospital readmission and (3) incidence of catheter-related infections. Forty-two interventions were considered as important for quality of care (28/42 based on published guidelines; 14/42 newly suggested by Delphi panel). The topics 'Liver disease' and 'Metabolic bone disease' were considered less important for cancer patients, together with use of infusion pumps (p = 0.004) and monitoring of vitamins and trace elements (p = 0.000). Monitoring of QoL is considered more important for cancer patients (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Using a two-round Delphi approach, we developed a minimal set of 42 interventions that may be used to determine quality of care in HPN patients with malignancies. This set of interventions differs from a similar set developed for benign patients.

Development of quality of care interventions for adult patients on home parenteral nutrition (HPN) with a benign underlying disease using a two-round Delphi approach.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: HPN patients with benign diseases deserve professional care as they have to deal with complex techniques and risk potentially dangerous complications. The aim was to highlight main outcome quality indicators and to develop a set of key interventions to direct multidisciplinary teams in providing qualitative care. METHODS: A two-round Delphi approach was used to build consensus on the most important outcome indicators and on 59 interventions identified in existing guidelines on HPN. Comments and interventions newly identified in the first round were co-evaluated in the second round. RESULTS: 29 experts from 9 countries completed the two-round Delphi approach. The outcome indicators rated as the most important are 1) incidence of catheter-related infections, 2) incidence of readmission and quality of life (shared second place) and 3) incidence of dehydration. Sixty eight of a total of 89 interventions were considered as important for the quality of care, of which 46 are based on published guidelines and 22 were newly suggested by the Delphi panel. CONCLUSIONS: Using a two-round Delphi approach, consensus was reached for the majority of interventions concerning HPN patients with benign diseases. This set of 68 interventions could be of use as a starting point for quality-improvement programs.

Guidelines recommendations on care of adult patients receiving home parenteral nutrition: a systematic review of global practices.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Because home parenteral nutrition (HPN) in adult patients can give rise to a variety of complications, good guidance is necessary. To achieve this, clarity and consistency in guidelines are essential. The aim of this review is to identify and compare evidence-based guidelines, and to compile a list of main recommendations, according to their evidence-based grade. METHODS: We searched Medline and the international guideline database for HPN guidelines, performed a content analysis of retrieved guidelines, and evaluated their quality. We then compiled a comparative table of guideline recommendations along with their assigned level of evidence. SUMMARY OF RESULTS: Six systematically developed evidence-based guidelines and one expert opinion-based standard for home care were retrieved. Of these guidelines, two were exclusively devoted to HPN. Although the guidelines generally covered the same topics, most did not provide information on intravenous medication, bone metabolic disease, and indications in patients with malignant disease. Moreover, we found grading discrepancies among various guidelines, as identical recommendations were often labeled with different grades. CONCLUSION: Our comparison of guidelines and standards for HPN revealed substantial differences among recommendations. Identification of these discrepancies and omissions should facilitate the development of more comprehensive and better justified guidelines in the future.