We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
RESEARCH SUPPORT, U.S. GOV'T, NON-P.H.S.
Current use and clinical outcome of home parenteral and enteral nutrition therapies in the United States.
Gastroenterology 1995 August
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Home nutrition support, especially when delivered parenterally, is very costly. The aim of this study is to examine current usage of home parenteral and enteral nutrition (HPEN) in the United States and the quality of therapy outcome.
METHODS: Medicare HPEN use from 1989 to 1992 was analyzed to assess use, growth, and costs. National Registry information collected on 9288 patients treated with HPEN from 1985 to 1992 was used to assess disease distribution and therapy outcome.
RESULTS: In the United States, there were approximately 40,000 parenteral and 152,000 enteral home patients in 1992. The usage of HPEN doubled between 1989 and 1992, and a large proportion was in patients with short survival. The prevalence of HPEN in the United States was 4-10 times higher than in other Western countries. Outcome data showed both therapies were relatively safe. The primary disease strongly influenced survival and rehabilitation, and age, per se, was not a reason to deny HPEN.
CONCLUSIONS: Predicted quality survival at home for several months, rather than a specific diagnosis, seems to be the soundest justification for HPEN. Its role in terminal conditions and patients without primary gastrointestinal diseases needs further evaluations.
METHODS: Medicare HPEN use from 1989 to 1992 was analyzed to assess use, growth, and costs. National Registry information collected on 9288 patients treated with HPEN from 1985 to 1992 was used to assess disease distribution and therapy outcome.
RESULTS: In the United States, there were approximately 40,000 parenteral and 152,000 enteral home patients in 1992. The usage of HPEN doubled between 1989 and 1992, and a large proportion was in patients with short survival. The prevalence of HPEN in the United States was 4-10 times higher than in other Western countries. Outcome data showed both therapies were relatively safe. The primary disease strongly influenced survival and rehabilitation, and age, per se, was not a reason to deny HPEN.
CONCLUSIONS: Predicted quality survival at home for several months, rather than a specific diagnosis, seems to be the soundest justification for HPEN. Its role in terminal conditions and patients without primary gastrointestinal diseases needs further evaluations.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app