ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical impact of lowering the peripheral parenteral nutrition (PPN) maximum osmolarity limit from 1000 to 900 mOsm/L in patients in two neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study including inborn neonates that received PPN for at least 3 consecutive days within the first 14 days of life. Data were evaluated to compare the ability of PPN with a maximum osmolarity limit of 1000 to 900 mOsm/L to provide daily recommended macronutrient doses, and daily recommended goal calories, as well as to compare the incidence of significant peripheral intravenous (PIV) infiltrates. RESULTS: A total of 200 PPN orders representing 57 patients were included for analysis, with 100 PPN orders in each osmolarity cohort. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two cohorts. Significantly more PPN orders met goal amino acid doses (45% vs. 24%, p = 0.003) and goal intravenous fat emulsion (IVFE) doses (61% vs. 37%, p = 0.001) in the 1000 mOsm/L osmolarity limit cohort compared to the 900 mOsm/L osmolarity limit cohort. A total of three patients received hyaluronidase for PN infiltration, two in the 1000 mOsm/L osmolarity limit and one in the 900 mOsm/L osmolarity limit cohort (p = 0.6). CONCLUSION: A lower PPN osmolarity limit of 900 mOsm/L significantly limited the ability to provide goal amino acid and IVFE doses to NICU patients compared to the previous osmolarity limit of 1000 mOsm/L without reducing the incidence of PIV infiltration or extravasation.
Subject(s)
Intensive Care Units, Neonatal , Parenteral Nutrition , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Retrospective Studies , Osmolar Concentration , Parenteral Nutrition/methods , Intensive Care Units, Neonatal/statistics & numerical data , Male , Female , Fat Emulsions, Intravenous/administration & dosage , Energy Intake , Amino Acids/analysis , Amino Acids/administration & dosageABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting significantly increases recovery time, reduces patient satisfaction, and increases time to discharge. Consensus guidelines for the management of postoperative nausea and vomiting highlight effective methods for prophylaxis and treatment. Implications of adherence to these guidelines include both improved patient outcomes and reduced healthcare costs. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the incidence, contributing factors, and current prescribing practices for prophylaxis and treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting. METHODS: Electronic medical records were assessed for adult patients who had an elective gastrointestinal or gynaecologic surgical procedure over a one-year period. Patient demographics and perioperative data were collected to assess risk factors and the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The appropriateness of prophylaxis and treatment was assessed according to current guidelines. RESULTS: The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was consistent with previously noted findings. The average time spent under anaesthesia was significantly higher in patients who experienced postoperative nausea and vomiting. Appropriate evidence-based rescue therapy was administered in a minority of the cohort experiencing postoperative nausea and vomiting. CONCLUSION: There is substantial opportunity for provider education and adherence to best prescribing practices. Enhanced adherence to evidence-based rescue therapy prescribing may improve patient outcomes and satisfaction.