Back to Browse Journals » Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management » Volume 9

Prescribing practice and evaluation of appropriateness of enteral nutrition in a university teaching hospital

Authors Zhu XP, Zhu LL, Zhou Q

Received 2 December 2012

Accepted for publication 8 January 2013

Published 7 February 2013 Volume 2013:9 Pages 37—43

DOI https://dx.doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S41022

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 2

Xiu-Ping Zhu,1 Ling-Ling Zhu,2 Quan Zhou1

1Department of Pharmacy, 2Cadre Department, Division of Nursing, The Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, People’s Republic of China

Background: A retrospective utilization study was performed to evaluate utilization patterns for enteral nutrition in a university teaching hospital.
Methods: Enteral nutrition was divided into three types according to the nitrogen source, ie, total protein type [Nutrison Fibre®, Fresubin Energy Fibre®, Fresubin®, Supportan® (a special immunonutrition for cancer patients or patients with increased demands for omega-3 fatty acids), Fresubin Diabetes® (a diabetes-specific formula), Ensure®]; short peptide type (Peptison®); and amino acid type (Vivonex®). A pharmacoeconomic analysis was done based on defined daily dose methodology.
Results: Among hospitalized patients taking enteral nutrition, 34.8% received enteral nutrition alone, 30% concomitantly received parenteral nutrition, and 35.2% received enteral nutrition after parenteral nutrition. Combined use of the different formulas was observed in almost all hospitalized patients receiving enteral nutrition. In total, 61.5% of patients received triple therapy with Nutrison Fibre, Fresubin Diabetes, and Supportan. Number of defined daily doses (total dose consumed/defined daily dose, also called DDDs) of formulas in descending order were as follows: Nutrison Fibre, Fresubin Energy Fibre, Fresubin Diabetes > Supportan > Peptison, Ensure > Vivonex, Fresubin. The ratio of the cumulative DDDs for the three types of enteral nutrition was 35:2.8:1 (total protein type to short peptide type to amino acid type). Off-label use of Fresubin Diabetes was also observed, with most of this formula being prescribed for patients with stress hyperglycemia. Only 2.1% of cancer patients received Supportan. There were 35 cases of near misses in dispensing look-alike or sound-alike enteral nutrition formulas, and one adverse drug reaction in an elderly malnourished patient who did not receive vitamin K1-enriched enteral nutrition during treatment with cefoperazone. After 4 months of the trial intervention, off-label use of Fresubin Diabetes was no longer endorsed by the Drug and Therapeutics Committee for nondiabetic patients, and the proportion of this formula prescribed for patients with stress hyperglycemia decreased by 20%, with a 10-fold increase in the amount of Supportan prescribed for cancer patients. Near misses in dispensing look-alike or sound-alike enteral nutrition were successfully abolished, and no severe coagulation disorders occurred after prophylactic administration of vitamin K1-enriched enteral nutrition in elderly malnourished patients receiving cefoperazone.
Conclusion: This utilization study indicates that continuous quality improvement is necessary and that a Drug and Therapeutics Committee can play an important role in promoting rational and safe use of enteral nutrition. Appropriateness of this therapy still needs to be improved, especially in addressing the issues of non-evidence-based combined use of multiple enteral nutrition formulas, the relatively high rate of concomitant use of enteral and parenteral nutrition, off-label use of diabetes-specific Fresubin Diabetes, insufficient use of Supportan in cancer patients, and unnecessary use of Supportan in intensive care patients not suffering from cancer.

Keywords: enteral nutrition, drug utilization, indications, parenteral nutrition, pharmacoeconomics, rational drug use

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML] 

 

Other articles by this author:

Weight-based dosing in medication use: what should we know?

Pan SD, Zhu LL, Chen M, Xia P, Zhou Q

Patient Preference and Adherence 2016, 10:549-560

Published Date: 12 April 2016

A stewardship intervention program for safe medication management and use of antidiabetic drugs

Zhao RY, He XW, Shan YM, Zhu LL, Zhou Q

Clinical Interventions in Aging 2015, 10:1201-1212

Published Date: 23 July 2015

The optimal choice of medication administration route regarding intravenous, intramuscular, and subcutaneous injection

Jin JF, Zhu LL, Chen M, Xu HM, Wang HF, Feng XQ, Zhu XP, Zhou Q

Patient Preference and Adherence 2015, 9:923-942

Published Date: 2 July 2015

Pharmacokinetic drug interactions with clopidogrel: updated review and risk management in combination therapy

Wang ZY, Chen M, Zhu LL, Yu LS, Zeng S, Xiang MX, Zhou Q

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management 2015, 11:449-467

Published Date: 19 March 2015

Personalized therapeutics for levofloxacin: a focus on pharmacokinetic concerns

Gao CH, Yu LS, Zeng S, Huang YW, Zhou Q

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management 2014, 10:217-227

Published Date: 27 March 2014

Appropriateness of administration of nasogastric medication and preliminary intervention

Zhu LL, Xu LC, Wang HQ, Jin JF, Wang HF, Zhou Q

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management 2012, 8:393-401

Published Date: 20 November 2012

Readers of this article also read:

Emerging and future therapies for hemophilia

Carr ME, Tortella BJ

Journal of Blood Medicine 2015, 6:245-255

Published Date: 3 September 2015

Green synthesis of water-soluble nontoxic polymeric nanocomposites containing silver nanoparticles

Prozorova GF, Pozdnyakov AS, Kuznetsova NP, Korzhova SA, Emel’yanov AI, Ermakova TG, Fadeeva TV, Sosedova LM

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2014, 9:1883-1889

Published Date: 16 April 2014

Methacrylic-based nanogels for the pH-sensitive delivery of 5-Fluorouracil in the colon

Ashwanikumar N, Kumar NA, Nair SA, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5769-5779

Published Date: 15 November 2012

Cross-linked acrylic hydrogel for the controlled delivery of hydrophobic drugs in cancer therapy

Deepa G, Thulasidasan AK, Anto RJ, Pillai JJ, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:4077-4088

Published Date: 27 July 2012

Particle size reduction to the nanometer range: a promising approach to improve buccal absorption of poorly water-soluble drugs

Rao S, Song Y, Peddie F, Evans AM

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2011, 6:1245-1251

Published Date: 20 June 2011

Current and developing therapeutic agents in the treatment of Chagas disease

Werner Apt

Drug Design, Development and Therapy 2010, 4:243-253

Published Date: 17 September 2010

Crystallization after intravitreal ganciclovir injection

Pitipol Choopong, Nattaporn Tesavibul, Nattawut Rodanant

Clinical Ophthalmology 2010, 4:709-711

Published Date: 14 July 2010