Characteristics and feeding intolerance in critically ill adult patients receiving peptide-based enteral nutrition: A retrospective cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients who experience gastrointestinal (GI) intolerance and hyperglycemia (or glucose intolerance) may not achieve appropriate caloric requirements and experience poor outcomes. The aim was to examine patient characteristics, disease severity, and enteral nutrition (EN) formula use in relation to feeding intolerance and healthcare resource utilization. METHODS: A retrospective, cross-sectional design using real-world data from PINC AI™ Healthcare Database, 2015-2019 was used. Critically ill hospitalized adults who required ≥3 days of 100% whey peptide-based EN, other peptide-based diets, or intact-protein standard and diabetic EN formulas were included. Primary outcomes were enteral feeding intolerance, including GI intolerance and hyperglycemia. Pairwise comparisons of other peptide-based and standard intact-protein groups with 100% whey-peptide were completed. Associations between EN group with GI intolerance and hyperglycemia, respectively, were evaluated via multivariable logistic regressions. RESULTS: Across 67 US hospitals, 19,679 inpatients (3242,100% whey-peptide, 3121 other peptide-based, and 13,316 standard intact-protein) were included. The 100% whey-peptide group had higher severity of illness and frequencies of comorbidities compared with other peptide-based and standard intact-protein groups. Hospital length of stay, intensive care unit stay, and 30-day readmission were similar across peptide-based cohorts. After controlling for demographic, visit, and severity characteristics, odds of GI intolerance were 18% higher for the other peptide-based group and 15% higher for the standard intact-protein group compared with the 100% whey-peptide group (each P < 0.03). In secondary analysis, odds of hyperglycemia were 81% higher for the other peptide-based group compared with the subgroup of very high-protein/low carbohydrate 100% whey-peptide (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Lower GI intolerance and greater glycemic control were associated with the use of 100% whey-peptide formulas relative to other formulas. Appropriate and optimal delivery of EN using specialized peptide-based formulas is a strategy to minimize feeding intolerance and benefit critically ill patients.

Incidence and risk factors for postoperative gastrointestinal dysfunction occurrence after gastrointestinal procedures in US patients.

BACKGROUND: Incidence of, and potential risk factors for, postoperative gastrointestinal dysfunction (POGD) after gastrointestinal procedures performed in US hospitals were examined. METHODS: This retrospective study used hospital discharge data of inpatients who underwent ≥1 gastrointestinal procedures from 1-Jan-2016 to 30-Apr-2019. POGD incidence was calculated based on all hospitalizations for MDC-06 procedures. Predictors of POGD were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: POGD incidence was 5.8% among 638 611 inpatient hospitalizations. Major bowel procedures, peritoneal adhesiolysis, and appendectomy were the most notable predictors of POGD among gastrointestinal procedures assessed (adjusted odds ratios [95% confidence intervals]: 2.71 [2.59-2.83], 2.48 [2.34-2.64], and 2.15 [2.03-2.27], respectively; all p < 0.05). Procedures performed by colorectal/gastroenterology specialists (0.86 [0.84-0.89]), and those performed percutaneously (0.55 [0.54-0.56]) were associated with significantly lower odds of POGD (both P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Findings may help clinicians tailor management plans targeting patients at high-risk of POGD.

Healthcare Resource Utilization and Cost Comparisons of High-Protein Enteral Nutrition Formulas Used in Critically Ill Patients.

Background: High-protein enteral nutrition is advised for patients who are critically ill. Options include immunonutrition formulas of various compositions and standard high-protein formulas (StdHP). Additional research is needed on the health economic value of immunonutrition in a broad cohort of severely ill hospitalized patients. Objective: The study goal was to compare healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and cost between immunonutrition and StdHP using real-world evidence from a large US administrative database. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was designed using the PINC AI™ Healthcare Database from 2015 to 2019. IMPACT® Peptide 1.5 (IP) was compared with Pivot® 1.5 (PC), and StdHP formulas. Inclusion criteria comprised patients age 18+ with at least 1 day's stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and at least 3 out of 5 consecutive days of enteral nutrition. Pairwise comparisons of demographics, clinical characteristics, HCRU, and costs were conducted between groups. Multivariable regression was used to assess total hospital cost per day associated with enteral nutrition cohort. Results: A total of 5752 patients were identified across 27 hospitals. Overall, a median 7 days of enteral nutrition was received over a 16-day hospital and 10-day ICU stay. Median total and daily hospital costs were lower for IP vs PC ($71 196 vs $80 696, P<.001) and ($4208 vs $4373, P=.019), with each higher than StdHP. However, after controlling for covariates such as mortality risk, surgery, and discharge disposition, average total hospital cost per day associated with IP use was 24% lower than PC, and 12% lower than StdHP (P<.001). Readmissions within 30 days were less frequent for patients receiving IP compared with PC (P<.02) and StdHP (P<.001). Discussion: Choice of high-protein enteral nutrition for patients in the ICU has implications for HCRU and daily hospital costs. Considering these correlations is important when comparing formula ingredients and per unit costs. Among the enteral nutrition products studied, IP emerged as the most cost-saving option, with lower adjusted hospital cost per day than PC or StdHP. Conclusions: Using a select immunonutrition formula for critically ill patients may provide overall cost savings for the healthcare system.

A retrospective study of in-hospital mortality in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis between 2015 and 2018.

Hospitalizations are common in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and are associated with high mortality. We used data from the Premier Healthcare Database to determine in-hospital mortality rates and the factors associated with in-hospital mortality in patients with IPF in the era of approved antifibrotic drugs.The Premier Healthcare Database is a detailed and broadly representative database of hospital admissions and discharges in the US. Patients with IPF who were hospitalized between 1 January 2015 and 28 February 2018 were identified using a diagnostic algorithm comprising International Classification of Diseases -9 and International Classification of Diseases -10 diagnostic codes and billing data. Associations between patient-, hospital- and treatment-related factors and a composite outcome of death during the index visit, lung transplant during the index visit but >1 day after admission, or death during a readmission within 90 days of the index visit were analyzed using logistic regression.The cohort comprised 9667 hospitalized patients with IPF. In total, 1414 patients (14.6%) met the composite outcome: 1036 (10.7%) died during the index visit, 371 (3.8%) died during a readmission within 90 days; 7 (0.1%) underwent lung transplant >1 day after admission. Factors significantly associated with a higher risk of the composite outcome included mechanical ventilation (odds ratio 6.41 [95% CI: 5.24, 7.84]), admission to the intensive care unit (1.73 [1.49, 2.00]), attendance by a critical care physician (2.12 [1.33, 3.38]), older age (1.20 [1.12, 1.28] per 10-year increase), and use of intravenous steroids (1.16 [1.00, 1.34]), intravenous antibiotics (1.49 [1.22, 1.83]) and opioids (3.41 [2.95, 3.93]). Factors significantly associated with a lower risk of the composite outcome included female sex (0.70 [0.61, 0.80]), comorbid chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (0.69 [0.60, 0.78]), attendance by a family medicine physician (0.67 [0.48, 0.94]) or internal medicine physician (0.59 [0.46, 0.75]), and use of oral steroids (0.62 [0.51, 0.77]), statins (0.76 [0.67, 0.87]) and proton pump inhibitors (0.80 [0.70, 0.92]).In conclusion, patients with IPF are at risk of mortality during a hospital stay or readmission within 90 days, particularly those who receive mechanical ventilation.

In-Hospital Mortality in Patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: A US Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: In patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), hospitalizations are associated with high mortality. We sought to determine in-hospital mortality rates and factors associated with in-hospital mortality in patients with IPF. METHODS: Patients with IPF were identified from the Premier Healthcare Database, a representative administrative dataset that includes > 20% of hospital discharges in the US, using an algorithm based on diagnostic codes and billing data. We used logistic regression to analyze associations between patient-, hospital-, and treatment-related characteristics and a composite primary outcome of death during the index visit, lung transplant during the index visit and > 1 day after admission, or death during a readmission within 90 days. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 6665 patients with IPF hospitalized between October 2011 and October 2014. A total of 963 (14.4%) met the primary outcome. Factors significantly associated with a higher risk of the primary outcome included mechanical ventilation [odds ratio 4.65 (95% CI 3.73, 5.80)], admission to the intensive care unit [1.83 (1.52, 2.21)], treatment with opioids (3.06 [2.57, 3.65]), and a diagnosis of pneumonia [1.44 (1.21, 1.71)]. Factors significantly associated with a lower risk included concurrent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [0.65 (0.55, 0.77)] and female sex [0.67 (0.57, 0.79)]. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with IPF, particularly those receiving mechanical ventilation or intensive care, are at substantial risk of death or lung transplant during hospitalization or death during a readmission within 90 days.

Evaluation of Healthcare Use and Clinical Outcomes of Alvimopan in Patients Undergoing Bowel Resection: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative ileus is a significant complication after bowel resection surgeries. Alvimopan is the only US Food and Drug Administration-approved therapy for accelerating the return of bowel function after large- and small-bowel resection. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to estimate the healthcare use and in-hospital morbidities associated with on-label use of alvimopan in patients undergoing bowel resection surgeries. DESIGN: A retrospective observational propensity-matched cohort study was conducted using a large hospital administrative database. SETTING: The study included inpatient postsurgical patients. PATIENTS: Patients aged ≥18 years undergoing a primary large or small segmental bowel resection with discharge dates between January 2010 and December 2014 were included. INTERVENTIONS: Patients receiving 2 to 15 doses of alvimopan were defined as the treatment cohort, and those without any alvimopan use were included as control subjects. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was postoperative length of stay. Secondary outcomes included postoperative in-hospital morbidities, inpatient mortality, intensive care unit length of stay, discharge disposition, and 30-day readmission. RESULTS: Each propensity-score matched cohort included 18,559 patients. The mean (±SD) postoperative length of stay was 4.62 ± 2.45 days in alvimopan-treated patients compared with 5.24 ± 3.35 days in control subjects (p < 0.001). Alvimopan-treated patients had lower rates of postoperative GI complication (12.15% vs 16.50%; p < 0.001). The rates of urinary tract infections; other postoperative infections; and cardiovascular, pulmonary, thromboembolic, and cerebrovascular events were also lower compared with the control subjects. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its inability to generalize to the US population, because the database included a convenience sample of hospital discharges. The identification of patients undergoing bowel resection and their clinical conditions relied on the accuracy and completeness of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis and procedure coding. There may be a confounding effect by the use of enhanced recovery pathways associated with the use of alvimopan. CONCLUSIONS: The use of alvimopan was associated with a reduction of 0.62 days in postsurgery length of stay and lower rates of postoperative GI complications, infections, and other in-hospital morbidities. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A703.

Use of doripenem and risk of seizure and renal impairment in US hospitalized patients: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: A large retrospective database study was conducted to assess the incidence rate of treatment-emergent renal impairment/failure, seizure, and hemolytic anemia in doripenem and imipenem intravenous (IV)-exposed patients treated for complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) and complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) in US hospitals. METHODS: Using the Premier Perspective™ Database (PPD), which maintains hospital discharge records for over 309 million patients, the incidence rate of treatment-emergent renal impairment/failure, seizure, and hemolytic anemia in the doripenem-treated compared with imipenem IV-treated population was examined. RESULTS: The unadjusted doripenem rate ratio (RR) for renal impairment/failure relative to imipenem IV was 1.13 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-1.21; p < 0.0001]. The unadjusted doripenem rate ratio for seizure relative to imipenem IV was 0.74 (95% CI 0.52-1.05; p = 0.07). In the comparative safety analysis, adjusted incidence rates of renal impairment/failure between doripenem-exposed patients and a propensity score-matched comparator cohort of imipenem IV-exposed patients showed no statistically significant difference in cUTI [RR = 1.02; 95% CI 0.93-1.12; p = 0.71] or cIAI (RR = 1.17; 95% CI 1.00-1.36; p = 0.05). Likewise, there was no statistically significant difference in adjusted incidence rates for seizures in doripenem-treated versus matched imipenem-treated patients for cUTI (RR = 0.69; 95% CI 0.41-1.14; p = 0.15) or cIAI (RR = 0.45; 95% CI 0.15-1.41; p = 0.17). No hemolytic anemia events were observed in this study. CONCLUSIONS: In this large retrospective cohort study of US hospitalized patients, no statistically significant differences in the adjusted relative rates of renal impairment/failure and seizure were observed between doripenem and a propensity score-matched comparator cohort of imipenem IV patients in the treatment of cUTI and cIAI.

Impact of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea on acute care length of stay, hospital costs, and readmission: A multicenter retrospective study of inpatients, 2009-2011.

BACKGROUND: The recent epidemiologic changes of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) have resulted in substantial economic burden to U.S. acute care hospitals. Past studies evaluating CDAD-attributable costs have been geographically and demographically limited. Here, we describe CDAD-attributable burden in inpatients, overall, and in vulnerable subpopulations from the Premier hospital database, a large, diverse cohort with a wide range of high-risk subgroups. METHODS: Discharges from the Premier database were retrospectively analyzed to assess length of stay (LOS), total inpatient costs, readmission, and inpatient mortality. RESULTS: Patients with CDAD had significantly worse outcomes than matched controls in terms of total LOS, rates of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and inpatient mortality. After adjustment for risk factors, patients with CDAD had increased odds of inpatient mortality, total and ICU LOS, costs, and odds of 30-, 60- and 90-day all-cause readmission versus non-CDAD patients. CDAD-attributable costs were higher in all studied vulnerable subpopulations, which also had increased odds of 30-, 60- and 90-day all-cause readmission than those without CDAD. CONCLUSION: Given the significant economic impact CDAD has on hospitals, prevention of initial episodes and targeted therapy to prevent recurrences in vulnerable patients are essential to decrease the overall burden to hospitals.

Differences in resource utilization between patients with diabetes receiving glycemia-targeted specialized nutrition vs standard nutrition formulas in U.S. hospitals.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study was to compare patient outcomes and costs for patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) receiving glycemia-targeted specialized nutrition (GTSN) with similar patients receiving standard nutrition (STDN) formulas during acute care hospitalizations. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The study was designed as a retrospective analysis over a 10-year period (2000-2009) of clinical and cost data from 125,000 hospital inpatient episodes in the Premier Research Database. Patients received either GTSN or STDN, by tube or orally, as a component of comprehensive care for hyperglycemia in patients with DM. To adjust for potential cohort imbalances, GTSN patients were matched with STDN patients on the basis of propensity scores, adjusting for many characteristics, including age, sex, race, All Patient Refined Diagnosis-Related Group (APR-DRG) illness severity, APR-DRG mortality risk, and comorbidities. RESULTS: Tube-fed patients with DM who were provided GTSN had a 0.88-day (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-1.02) shorter length of hospital stay (LOS) on average compared with those patients provided STDN. Orally fed patients with DM who were provided GTSN had a 0.17-day (95% CI, 0.14-0.21) shorter LOS than did those patients provided STDN. The shorter LOS associated with GTSN contributed to a cost savings of $2586 for tube-fed patients and $1356 for orally fed patients. CONCLUSIONS: The use of GTSN feeding formulas for patients with DM in acute care hospital settings was associated with reduced LOS and inpatient hospital episode cost in comparison to STDN.

Evaluation of incremental healthcare resource burden and readmission rates associated with hospitalized hyponatremic patients in the US.

BACKGROUND: Hyponatremia is a prevalent electrolyte disorder in hospitalized patients indicative of greater morbidity and mortality. A large-scale retrospective analysis was conducted to evaluate the incremental burden of hospitalized hyponatremic (HN) versus non-HN patients in terms of hospital resource utilization, costs, and hospital readmissions in the real-world setting. METHODS: HN patients (≥18 years) were selected from the Premier Hospital Database between January 1, 2007 and March 31, 2010 and matched to a non-HN control cohort using propensity score matching. Bivariate and multivariate statistics were employed to evaluate the differences in healthcare resource utilization, costs, and hospital readmissions between patient cohorts. RESULTS: Among the matched patient cohorts, length of stay (LOS) (8.8 ± 10.3 vs 7.7 ± 8.5 days, P < 0.001), hospital admission costs ($15,281 ± $24,054 vs $13,439 ± $22,198, P < 0.001), intensive care unit (ICU) LOS (5.5 ± 7.9 vs 4.9 ± 7.1 days, P < 0.001), and ICU costs ($8525 ± $13,342 vs $7597 ± $12,695, P < 0.001) were greater for the HN versus non-HN cohort, as were hospital readmission rates 30 days postdischarge. Multivariate regressions further demonstrated that hyponatremia was associated with an increase of 10.9% for LOS, 8.2% for total hospitalization costs, 10.2% for ICU LOS, and 8.9% for ICU costs. Additionally, after multivariate adjustment, hyponatremia was associated with a 15.0% increased chance for hospital readmission 30 days postdischarge (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Hyponatremia is an independent predictor of increased hospitalization LOS and cost, ICU admission and cost, and 30-day hospital readmission, and therefore represents a potential target for intervention to reduce healthcare expenditures for a large population of hospitalized hyponatremic patients.

Colorectal cancer screening use among insured primary care patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare colorectal cancer (CRC) screening use, including changes over time and demographic characteristics associated with screening receipt, between 2 insured primary care populations. STUDY DESIGN: Clinical and administrative records from 2 large health systems, one in New Mexico and the other in Michigan, were used to determine use of CRC screening tests between 2004 and 2008 among patients aged 51 to 74 years. METHODS: Generalized estimating equations were used to evaluate trends in CRC screening use over time and the association of demographic and other factors with screening receipt. RESULTS: Rates of CRC screening use ranged from 48.1% at the New Mexico site to 68.7% at the Michigan site, with colonoscopy being the most frequently used modality. Fecal occult blood test was used inconsistently by substantial proportions of patients who did not meet the definition of screening users. Screening use was positively and significantly associated with older age, male sex, and more periodic health examinations and other types of primary care visits; at the Michigan site, it was also associated with African American race, married status, and higher annual estimated household income. CONCLUSIONS: Among insured primary care patients, CRC screening use falls short. Further research is needed to determine what factors are barriers to routine fecal occult blood test or colonoscopy use among insured patients who have access to and regularly use primary care and how those barriers can be eliminated.

A comparative analysis of recruitment methods used in a randomized trial of diabetes education interventions.

Recruitment methods heavily impact budget and outcomes in clinical trials. We conducted a post-hoc examination of the efficiency and cost of three different recruitment methods used in Journey for Control of Diabetes: the IDEA Study, a randomized controlled trial evaluating outcomes of group and individual diabetes education in New Mexico and Minnesota. Electronic databases were used to identify health plan members with diabetes and then one of the following three methods was used to recruit study participants: 1. Minnesota Method 1--Mail only (first half of recruitment period). Mailed invitations with return-response forms. 2. Minnesota Method 2--Mail and selective phone calls (second half of recruitment period). Mailed invitations with return-response forms and subsequent phone calls to nonresponders. 3. New Mexico Method 3--Mail and non-selective phone calls (full recruitment period): Mailed invitations with subsequent phone calls to all. The combined methods succeeded in meeting the recruitment goal of 623 subjects. There were 147 subjects recruited using Minnesota's Method 1, 190 using Minnesota's Method 2, and 286 using New Mexico's Method 3. Efficiency rates (percentage of invited patients who enrolled) were 4.2% for Method 1, 8.4% for Method 2, and 7.9% for Method 3. Calculated costs per enrolled subject were $71.58 (Method 1), $85.47 (Method 2), and $92.09 (Method 3). A mail-only method to assess study interest was relatively inexpensive but not efficient enough to sustain recruitment targets. Phone call follow-up after mailed invitations added to recruitment efficiency. Use of return-response forms with selective phone follow-up to non-responders was cost effective.