| Title |
Reduced length of stay in radical cystectomy patients with oral versus parenteral post-operative nutrition protocol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11096-015-0072-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter Declercq, Gunter De Win, Frank Van der Aa, Beels Elodie, Lorenz Van der Linden, Hendrik Van Poppel, Willems Ludo, Spriet Isabel |
| Abstract |
Background In Europe, parenteral nutrition is often used after radical cystectomy to avoid postoperative malnourishment. To the best of our knowledge, however, there is a paucity of data to conclude on the best modality for delivering nutritional support to this patient group. Objective The parenteral nutrition policy was reconsidered and an oral nutrition protocol was implemented by the clinical pharmacist and evaluated in terms of length of stay, number and type of postoperative complications and parenteral nutrition avoided costs. Setting A prospective interventional non-randomized before-after study was conducted. Regular radical cystectomy patients presenting without preoperative contra-indications for enteral nutrition were eligible. Methods Postoperatively, in the control group, the parenteral nutrition policy from the ward was applied. Parenteral nutrition was initiated systematically and continued until the patient was able to tolerate solid food. In the interventional group, an oral nutrition protocol was implemented. Parenteral nutrition could be initiated if oral intake remained insufficient after 5 days. Main outcome measure The primary end point was postoperative length of stay. Secondary endpoints included the number of patients in whom the oral nutrition protocol was implemented successfully, as well as the number and type of postoperative complications. Results A total of 94 eligible patients was assigned consecutively to the control (n = 48) and to the interventional group (n = 46). Baseline demographics were comparable. A significant reduction in median length of stay was associated with the oral nutrition protocol [18 days (IQR 15-22) in the control group vs. 14 days (IQR 13-18) in the interventional group (p < 0.001)]. In 40 out of 46 patients from the interventional group, the oral nutrition protocol was implemented successfully. The number and type of postoperative complications did not differ significantly. Implementing the oral nutrition protocol resulted in a direct parenteral nutrition infusion bag cost saving of approximately <euro>512 and a reduction in hospitalization cost of <euro>2,608 per patient. Conclusion The findings of our study showed that an oral nutrition protocol, when compared to the systematic postoperative use of parenteral nutrition, was associated with a decreased length of stay and costs in a regular radical cystectomy patient population. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 33% |
| El Salvador | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 1 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 37 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 23% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 15% |
| Unknown | 9 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 56% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 January 2016.
All research outputs
#6,846,874
of 22,789,076 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#379
of 1,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,155
of 357,415 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#6
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,789,076 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,079 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 357,415 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.