RESUMO
Objetivos: El objetivo del trabajo fue analizar la calidad de la prescripción y seguimiento de la nutrición parenteral total (NPT) antes y después de la incorporación de un equipo de soporte nutricional (ESN).Material y métodos: Se seleccionó retrospectivamente una muestra aleatoria de 96 pacientes, 48 previos a la incorporación del ESN (grupo NOESN) y 48 posteriores (grupo ESN), a los que se les prescribió NPT. Se evaluó: l) la existencia de una valoración nutricional y analítica mínima, previa a la instauración de la NPT y 2) el seguimiento de la misma.Resultados: La duración media de la NPT por paciente fue de 13,8 días sin diferencias en ambos grupos. Existía constancia escrita del peso y la talla (respectivamente) en el 15 por ciento y 10 por ciento de los casos, en el grupo NOESN, frente al 100 por ciento y 99 por ciento en el ESN (p 2 modificaciones en el 2 por ciento, frente al 27 por ciento, 42 por ciento y 31 por ciento, respectivamente, en el grupo ESN (p < 0,0001). No existieron diferencias significativas en cuanto a complicaciones metabólicas entre los dos grupos.Conclusiones: La implantación de un equipo de soporte nutricional, encargado de la prescripción y seguimiento de la NPT, ha mejorado notablemente la calidad en el seguimiento de las mismas (AU)
Goals: The purpose of the study was to analyze the quality of the prescription and follow-up of the total parenteral nutrition (PNT) before and after the incorporation of a nutritional support team (NST). Material and methods: A random sample of 96 patients was selected retrospectively, with 48 prior to the incorporation of the NST (the Non-NST group) and 48 after its in-corporation (the NST group), to whom TPN was prescribed. The following points were assessed: 1. The existence of a minimum analytical and nutritional assessment, prior to the incorporation of TPN; 2. The follow-up of the same. Results: The average duration of TPN per patient was 13.8 days without differences between the two groups. There is a written record of the weight and height in 15% and 10% of cases, respectively, in the Non-NST group as opposed to 100% and 99% in the NST group (p < 0.0001). Prior to the incorporation of the NST, the nutritional requirement was not verified in any patients (0%) as opposed to 97% afterwards. Statistically significant differences were detected in the measurement of albumin prior to the start of TPN (p < 0.01). During the analytical follow-up, statistically significant differences were detected in the measurement of: blood tests (p < 0.05); basic biochemistry (p < 0.01); general biochemistry, magnesium, zinc, pre-albumin, transferrin and nitrogen balance (p < 0.0001). In the TPN follow-up, the Non-NST group did not change any of the components contained in it (in terms of volume, macro or micronutrients) in 81% of patients, while 17% had one change and 2% had 2 or more changes, as opposed to 27%, 42% and 31 %, respectively in the NST group (p < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in metabolic complications between the two groups. Conclusions: The implementation of a nutritional support team in charge of the prescription and follow-up of TPN has notably improved the quality of these follow-up studies (AU)
