Bloodstream infections associated with parenteral nutrition preparation methods in the United States: a retrospective, large database analysis

Background: The incidence of bloodstream infection (BSI) among patients receiving parenteral nutrition (PN) is reported to vary widely from 1.3%?39%. BSI rates in a large inpatient population were compared in this study to determine if PN prepared by different methods was associated with BSI. Methods: Data from Premier Perspective, the largest inpatient cost‐based clinical and financial claims database in the United States, were analyzed. Included were all hospitalized patients age ≥18 years who received any PN from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2007. BSI rates, the primary dependent variable, were defined as the occurrence ICD‐9 codes of 038.x (septicemia), 995.91 (sepsis), 995.92 (severe sepsis), and 790.7 (bacteremia). The exposure cohort received PN in a commercial multichamber bag (MCB) (n = 4669), whereas the comparator group received PN prepared by a pharmacy (either hospital compounded or outsourced; n = 64,315). Observed data were adjusted using multivariate logistic regression for baseline differences, risk factors, and potential confounders, with propensity score matching as a sensitivity analysis. Results: The observed and adjusted BSI rates indicate that MCB is associated with fewer infections than pharmacy‐prepared PN (observed 17.5% vs 26.6%; adjusted 19.6% vs 25.9%, both P < .001). Propensity‐matched scores found similar results with observed BSI rates of 18.9% in patients receiving MCB and 24.6% in patients receiving a compounded PN. Conclusion: Both the observed rate of BSI and adjusted probability of developing a BSI remained significantly lower for the MCB than the compounded PN group.     

Nutrition therapy cost analysis in the US

Background

Bloodstream infections (BSI) occur in up to 350 000 inpatient admissions each year in the US, with BSI rates among patients receiving parenteral nutrition (PN) varying from 1.3% to 39%. BSI-attributable costs were estimated to approximate $US12000 per episode in 2000. While previous studies have compared the cost of different PN preparation methods, this analysis evaluates both the direct costs of PN and the treatment costs for BSI associated with different PN delivery methods to determine whether compounded or manufactured pre-mixed PN has lower overall costs.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to compare costs in the US associated with compounded PN versus pre-mixed multi-chamber bag (MCB) PN based on underlying infection risk.

Methods

Using claims information from the Premier Perspective? database, multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate the risk of infection. A total of 44 358 hospitalized patients aged ≥18 years who received PN between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2007 were included in the analyses. A total of 3256 patients received MCB PN and 41 102 received compounded PN. The PN-associated costs and length of stay were analysed using multivariate ordinary least squares regression models constructed to measure the impact of infectious events on total hospital costs after controlling for baseline and clinical patient characteristics.

Results

There were 7.3 additional hospital days attributable to BSI. After adjustment for baseline variables, the probability of developing a BSI was 30% higher in patients receiving compounded PN than in those receiving MCB PN (16.1% vs 11.3%; odds ratio= 1.56; 95% CI 1.37, 1.79; p<0.0001), demonstrating 2172 potentially avoidable infections. The observed daily mean PN acquisition cost for patients receiving MCB PN was $US164 (including all additives and fees) compared with $US239 for patients receiving compounded PN (all differences p < 0.001). With a mean cost attributable to BSI of $US16 141, the total per-patient savings (including avoided BSI and PN costs) was $US1545.

Conclusion

In this analysis of real-world PN use, MCB PN is associated with lower costs than compounded PN with regards to both PN acquisition and potential avoidance of BSI. Our base case indicates that $US1545 per PN patient may be saved; even if as few as 50% of PN patients are candidates for standardized pre-mix formulations, a potential savings of $US773 per patient may be realized.     

A Comprehensive Analysis of the Costs of Severe Maternal Morbidity

IntroductionThe objectives of this study were to include readmissions and physician costs in the estimates of total costs of severe maternal morbidity (SMM), to consider the effect of SMM on maternal length of stay (LOS), and to examine these for the more restricted definition of SMM that excludes transfusion-only cases.MethodsCalifornia linked birth certificate-patient discharge data for 2009 through 2011 (n = 1,262,862) with complete costs and LOS were used in a secondary data analysis. Cost-to-charge ratios were used to estimate costs from charges, adjusting for inflation. Physician payments were estimated from the mean payments for specific diagnosis-related groups. Generalized linear models estimated the association between SMM and costs and LOS.ResultsExcluding readmissions and physician costs, SMM was associated with a 60% increase in hospital costs (marginal effect [ME] $3,550) and a 33% increase in LOS (ME 0.9 days). These increased to 70% (ME $5,806) and 46% (ME 1.3 days) when physician costs and readmissions were included. The effects of SMM were roughly one-half as large for patients who only required a blood transfusion (49% [ME $4,056] and 31% [ME 0.9 days]) as for patients who had another indicator for SMM (93% [ME $7,664] and 62% [ME 1.7 days]).ConclusionsPostpartum hospital readmissions and physician costs are important and previously unreported contributors to the costs of SMM. Excess costs and LOS associated with SMM vary considerably by indication. Cost effects were larger than the LOS effects, indicating that SMM increases treatment intensity beyond increasing LOS, and decreasing SMM may have broader health and cost benefits than previously understood.     

Methods to identify and compare parenteral nutrition administered from hospital-compounded and premixed multichamber bags in a retrospective hospital claims database

Purpose: Use of parenteral nutrition (PN) is indicated for patients who are unable to meet their needs enterally. PN may be administered via custom‐compounded mix or commercially available ready‐to‐use multichamber bags (MCB), but little is known about potential differences in clinical outcomes between these delivery systems. This study was undertaken to assess the feasibility of comparing custom‐compounded and MCB PN in a large hospital claims database. Methods: Hospital claims data from the Premier Perspective Comparative Hospital Database (PCD) reported from 2005 through 2007 were analyzed. The authors searched the data for patients who received any PN products, including compounded PN and MCB PN. Coding algorithms for identifying patient characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes of interest were explored. Results: Using hospital billing claims, the authors identified patients in the database treated with premixed PN from multichamber bags (“MCB only,” n = 4699) and patients treated with custom‐compounded PN solution (“compounded PN,” n = 64,315). Methods of identifying PN administration groups, patient characteristics and risk factors, outcomes of interest, and data limitations are described. Conclusions: Exploratory analysis suggests that comparisons of PN administered via compounding and MCB are possible using the Premier data. The ability to control for many identifiable risk factors allows data to be presented for the use of PN and related outcomes in both a clinically sensible and relevant manner, albeit with some limitations.     

临床营养支持模式与实施方法对成年急性重症患者近期临床结局的影响

目的 评估临床营养支持模式与实施方法对成年急性重症患者近期临床结局的影响.方法 回顾性分析1994年1月至2009年12月在海南省人民医院重症医学科收治的1503例成年急性重症患者的营养支持相关资料,比较不同营养支持模式与实施方法对营养支持并发症、患者在ICU停留时间、感染与多器官功能障碍综合征（MODS）发生率和病死率的影响.结果 所有患者营养风险筛查评分（NRS）均≥3分.早期肠内营养（EN）组患者在ICU的停留时间明显短于非早期EN组（P＜0.001）和肠外营养（PN）组（P＜0.001）,感染发生率（P均＜0.001）、MODS发生率（P均＜0.001）及病死率（P均＜0.001）也均明显低于非早期EN组和PN组患者.PN液中添加谷氨酰胺组患者在ICU停留时间明显短于未添加者（P=0.0000）,感染（P=0.0252）和MODS发生率（P=0.0030）及病死率（P=0.0305）均明显低于未添加者.强化胰岛素治疗组患者在ICU停留时间明显短于常规胰岛素治疗组（P=0.0000）,感染（P=0.0001）和MODS发生率（P=0.0237）及病死率（P=0.0427）均明显低于常规胰岛素治疗组.结论 重症患者普遍存在营养风险,需要给予营养支持.早期EN、PN液中添加谷氨酰胺及给予强化胰岛素治疗能够缩短患者在ICU停留的时间,降低感染和MODS发生率及病死率.     

Comparative Analysis of Length of Stay, Total Costs, and Treatment Success between Intravenous Moxifloxacin 400 mg and Levofloxacin 750 mg among Hospitalized Patients with Community-Acquired Pneumonia

Objective:  This study aimed to evaluate the length of stay (LOS), costs, and treatment consistency among patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) initially treated with intravenous (IV) moxifloxacin 400 mg or IV levofloxacin 750 mg.
Methods:  Adults with CAP receiving IV moxifloxacin or IV levofloxacin for ≥3 days were identified in the Premier Perspective comparative database. Primary outcomes were LOS and costs. Secondary outcomes included treatment consistency, which was defined as 1) no additional IV moxifloxacin or levofloxacin after ≥1 day off study drug; 2) no switch to another IV antibiotic; and 3) no addition of another IV antibiotic.
Results:  A total of 7720 patients met inclusion criteria (6040 receiving moxifloxacin; 1680 receiving levofloxacin). Propensity matching created two cohorts (1300 patients each) well matched for demographic, clinical, hospital, and payor characteristics. Before the patients were matched, mean LOS (5.87 vs. 5.46 days; P  = 0.0004) and total costs per patient ($7302 vs. $6362; P  < 0.0001) were significantly greater with moxifloxacin. After the patients were matched, mean LOS (5.63 vs. 5.51 days; P  = 0.462) and total costs ($6624 vs. $6473; P  = 0.476) were comparable in both cohorts. Treatment consistency was higher for moxifloxacin before (81.0% vs. 78.9%; P  = 0.048) and after matching (82.8% vs. 78.0%; P  = 0.002).
Conclusions:  In-hospital treatment of CAP with IV moxifloxacin 400 mg or IV levofloxacin 750 mg was associated with similar hospital LOS and costs in propensity-matched cohorts.     

Resource Utilization and Costs of Schizophrenia Patients Treated with Olanzapine versus Quetiapine in a Medicaid Population

ObjectiveCompare annual health-care costs and resource utilization associated with olanzapine versus quetiapine for treating schizophrenia in a Medicaid population.MethodsAdult schizophrenia patients were selected from deidentified Pennsylvania Medicaid claims database (1999–2003). Included patients were continuously enrolled and initiated with olanzapine or quetiapine monotherapy after a 90-day washout period. Treatment costs were calculated for 1-year post-therapy initiation and inflation adjusted to year 2003. To control for selection bias, olanzapine and quetiapine patients were 1:1 matched using an optimal matching algorithm on propensity score, which was generated using logistic regression controlling for demographics, prior drug therapy, utilization, and costs. Treatment costs for the matched cohorts were compared directly, as well as using a difference-in-difference analysis.ResultsA total of 6929 patients treated with olanzapine and 2321 with quetiapine met inclusion criteria. Quetiapine patients appeared more severe at baseline. After propensity score matching, 2321 patient pairs had similar baseline characteristics, including total costs. Compared with matched quetiapine patients, for the 1-year postindex period, olanzapine patients had similar drug costs ($6131 vs. $6014, P = 0.326), lower medical costs ($9897 vs. $11,218, P = 0.0128), and lower total health-care costs ($16,028 vs. $17,232, P = 0.0279). Lower psychiatric hospitalization costs account for most of the total cost difference. Difference-in-difference regression analysis confirmed olanzapine's economic advantage. Further adjusting for baseline variations, the total cost advantage of olanzapine patients was $962 (P = 0.032), and was mostly because of reduced psychiatric hospitalization costs of $992 (P = 0.004).ConclusionSchizophrenia patients treated with olanzapine had lower total costs than quetiapine patients, mostly attributable to reductions in psychiatric hospitalization costs.     

Comparative Incidence and Health Care Costs of Medically Attended Adverse Effects among U.S. Medicaid HIV Patients on Atazanavir- or Darunavir-Based Antiretroviral Therapy

ObjectivesThis is the first study to compare the incidence and health care costs of medically attended adverse effects in atazanavir- and darunavir-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) among U.S. Medicaid patients receiving routine HIV care.MethodsThis was a retrospective study using Medicaid administrative health care claims from 15 states. Subjects were HIV patients aged 18 to 64 years initiating atazanavir- or darunavir-based ART from January 1, 2003, to July 1, 2010, with continuous enrollment for 6 months before (baseline) and 6 months after (evaluation period) ART initiation and 1 or more evaluation period medical claim. Outcomes were incidence and health care costs of the following medically attended (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification–coded or treated) adverse effects during the evaluation period: gastrointestinal, lipid abnormalities, diabetes/hyperglycemia, rash, and jaundice. All-cause health care costs were also determined. Patients treated with atazanavir and darunavir were propensity score matched (ratio = 3:1) by using demographic and clinical covariates. Multivariable models adjusted for covariates lacking postmatch statistical balance.ResultsPropensity-matched study sample included 1848 atazanavir- and 616 darunavir-treated patients (mean age 41 years, 50% women, 69% black). Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) (for darunavir, reference = atazanavir) and per-patient-per-month health care cost differences (darunavir minus atazanavir) were as follows: gastrointestinal, HR = 1.25 (P = 0.04), $43 (P = 0.13); lipid abnormalities, HR = 1.38 (P = 0.07), $3 (P = 0.88); diabetes/hyperglycemia, HR = 0.84 (P = 0.55), $13 (P = 0.69); and rash, HR = 1.11 (P = 0.23), $0 (P = 0.76); all-cause health care costs were $1086 (P<0.001). Too few instances of jaundice (11 in atazanavir and 1 in darunavir) occurred to support multivariable modeling.ConclusionsMedication tolerability can be critical to the success or failure of ART. Compared with darunavir-treated patients, atazanavir-treated patients had significantly fewer instances of medically attended gastrointestinal issues and more instances of jaundice and incurred significantly lower health care costs.     

Granisetron Extended-Release Subcutaneous Injection versus Palonosetron Infusion for CINV Prevention: Cost Comparison of Unscheduled Hydration

BackgroundGranisetron extended-release subcutaneous (SC) injection is a novel formulation of granisetron for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Palonosetron is administered intravenously and is indicated for CINV prevention in acute and delayed phases after the use of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) and in the acute phase after highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). No data are available regarding the impact of SC granisetron on the cost of unscheduled hydration compared with other antiemetic drugs, specifically the older-generation palonosetron.ObjectiveTo compare the costs of unscheduled hydration associated with breakthrough CINV after SC granisetron versus palonosetron administration in patients receiving MEC or HEC.MethodsThis retrospective analysis was based on electronic medical records data from a single multicenter, community-based practice involving patients receiving MEC or HEC with a 3-drug antiemetic regimen, including a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, dexamethasone, and either SC granisetron or palonosetron. A cost-of-care analysis for SC granisetron and palonosetron was based on the maximum per-unit Medicare reimbursement amounts for the use of unscheduled hydration, administration of rescue antiemetic drugs, laboratory tests, and patient office evaluations.ResultsA total of 182 patient records were evaluated, 91 for patients receiving SC granisetron and 91 receiving palonosetron. The mean per-patient cost of care related to unscheduled hydration in patients receiving HEC or MEC was significantly lower with SC granisetron ($296) than palonosetron ($837; P <.0001), including subset analysis of patients requiring additional care (SC granisetron [$691], N = 39; palonosetron [$1058], N = 72; P = .0260). The mean hydration costs per patient receiving HEC or MEC were lower with SC granisetron ($62) than with palonosetron ($253; P <.0001). The hydration costs per patient receiving only HEC were lower with SC granisetron ($66) than palonosetron ($280; P <.0001). The per-patient costs were lower when SC granisetron was administered than when palonosetron was administered as part of the antiemetic regimen, except for the cost of rescue antiemetic drug in patients receiving MEC. Fewer median unscheduled hydration therapies per patient were used with SC granisetron versus palonosetron (HEC, 3 vs 5; MEC, 2 vs 3).ConclusionThe use of SC granisetron reduced the total per-patient costs of care associated with unscheduled hydration compared with palonosetron in patients receiving HEC or MEC for breakthrough CINV events.     

Granisetron Extended-Release Subcutaneous Injection versus Palonosetron Infusion for CINV Prevention: Cost Comparison of Unscheduled Hydration

BackgroundGranisetron extended-release subcutaneous (SC) injection is a novel formulation of granisetron for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Palonosetron is administered intravenously and is indicated for CINV prevention in acute and delayed phases after the use of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) and in the acute phase after highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). No data are available regarding the impact of SC granisetron on the cost of unscheduled hydration compared with other antiemetic drugs, specifically the older-generation palonosetron.ObjectiveTo compare the costs of unscheduled hydration associated with breakthrough CINV after SC granisetron versus palonosetron administration in patients receiving MEC or HEC.MethodsThis retrospective analysis was based on electronic medical records data from a single multicenter, community-based practice involving patients receiving MEC or HEC with a 3-drug antiemetic regimen, including a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, dexamethasone, and either SC granisetron or palonosetron. A cost-of-care analysis for SC granisetron and palonosetron was based on the maximum per-unit Medicare reimbursement amounts for the use of unscheduled hydration, administration of rescue antiemetic drugs, laboratory tests, and patient office evaluations.ResultsA total of 182 patient records were evaluated, 91 for patients receiving SC granisetron and 91 receiving palonosetron. The mean per-patient cost of care related to unscheduled hydration in patients receiving HEC or MEC was significantly lower with SC granisetron ($296) than palonosetron ($837; P <.0001), including subset analysis of patients requiring additional care (SC granisetron [$691], N = 39; palonosetron [$1058], N = 72; P = .0260). The mean hydration costs per patient receiving HEC or MEC were lower with SC granisetron ($62) than with palonosetron ($253; P <.0001). The hydration costs per patient receiving only HEC were lower with SC granisetron ($66) than palonosetron ($280; P <.0001). The per-patient costs were lower when SC granisetron was administered than when palonosetron was administered as part of the antiemetic regimen, except for the cost of rescue antiemetic drug in patients receiving MEC. Fewer median unscheduled hydration therapies per patient were used with SC granisetron versus palonosetron (HEC, 3 vs 5; MEC, 2 vs 3).ConclusionThe use of SC granisetron reduced the total per-patient costs of care associated with unscheduled hydration compared with palonosetron in patients receiving HEC or MEC for breakthrough CINV events.     

Hospital Readmissions for Catheter‐Related Bloodstream Infection and Use of Ethanol Lock Therapy

Background: Catheter‐related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) is the most serious long‐term infectious complication of long‐term home parenteral nutrition (PN). Ethanol is being used more commonly as a catheter locking solution in the home PN setting for prevention of CRBSI; however, no current literature reports the use of ethanol lock (ETL) in skilled nursing facility (SNF) patients. Methods: The authors evaluated the number of hospital readmissions for CRBSI and length of stay between SNF (not receiving ETL) and home patients (receiving or not receiving ETL) receiving PN or intravenous fluid therapy. Results: SNF patients had a significantly longer length of stay (LOS) for CRBSI hospital admissions compared with patients receiving PN at home with or without ETL (P < .001; 16 vs 8 vs 8 days). There was no LOS difference for CRBSI between home patients with or without ETL. Home PN patients not receiving ETL were more likely to have a CRBSI from Staphylococcus sp (48% vs 27%; P = .015), whereas SNF PN patients not receiving ETL were more likely to have a CRBSI from Enterococcus sp (16% vs 3%; P = .004). Conclusion: Despite different causative organisms and medical acuity likely affecting the differences observed in LOS, the SNF population is another setting ETL can be used to prevent CRBSI.     

Relationship of Nutritional Status to Length of Stay, Hospital Costs, and Discharge Status of Patients Hospitalized in the Medicine Service

Objective This study was conducted to determine the relationship, if any, between nutritional status, length of stay (LOS) in hospital, discharge placement, readmission rates, and hospital costs and charges in patients hospitalized in the medicine service.Design Data regarding medical diagnosis, LOS, hospital costs, charges, discharge destination, and readmission rates were collected prospectively from medical records and through patient interviews on patients admitted to the medical service who were classified to be at risk or not at risk for malnutrition on the basis of established criteria (weight for height <75% ideal body weight, admission serum albumin level <30 g/L, or ≥10% unintentional weight loss within 1 month before admission).Subjects All patients admitted directly to any of three medicine units during December 1994 who met study criteria were included in the study. Off-service patients, transfer patients, and patients discharged before screening (usually admitted and discharged within 72 hours) were excluded. Data were collected on 173 patients.Statistical analysis performed At-risk and not at-risk patients were compared for LOS, costs and reimbursement, and discharge placement (to home, to home with home health care services, or to another facility for further care). Two sample t tests and α survival analysis technique were used to compare continuous variables between the two study cohorts. Nonparametric tests were used for LOS and readmission data. χ² Tests were used for categoric variables. An a level of 0.05 was used throughout to determine statistical significance.Results Median LOS in the not-at-risk population (n=56) was significantly greater than in the not-at-risk population (n= 117): 6 days (25th percentile=4 days, 75th percentile-8 days) vs 4 days (25th percentile=3 days, 75th percentile=7 days) (P<0.01).Mean hospitalization cost per patient was also higher in the at-risk group ($6,196 vs $4,563, P<0.02). Readmission rate per month of follow-up was not significantly different. At-risk patients were significantly less likely to be discharged home with self-care (23 [41%] vs 77 [66%], P<0.05). At-risk patients were significantly more likely to use home health care service than not-at-risk patients (17 [31%] vs 14 or [12%], P<0.001).Applications Patients at risk for malnutrition had significantly higher LOS, costs, and home health care needs, despite the fact that 51, or 91%, received nutrition intervention while hospitalized. Further research should explore the use of nutrition screening and intervention before, during, and after hospitalization to ensure that appropriate nutrition intervention, as indicated by medical patients’ clinical condition and nutritional risk status, is initiated and continued.     

Increased hypoglycemia associated with renal failure during continuous intravenous insulin infusion and specialized nutritional support

ObjectiveTo evaluate glycemic control for critically ill, hyperglycemic trauma patients with renal failure who received concurrent intensive insulin therapy and continuous enteral nutrition (EN) or parenteral nutrition (PN).MethodsAdult trauma patients with renal failure who were given EN or PN concurrently with continuous graduated intravenous regular human insulin (RHI) infusion for at least 3 d were evaluated. Our conventional RHI algorithm was modified for those with renal failure by allowing greater changes in blood glucose (BG) concentrations before the infusion rate was escalated. BG concentration was determined every 1 to 2 h while receiving the insulin infusion. BG control was evaluated on the day before RHI infusion and for a maximum of 7 d while receiving RHI. Target BG during the RHI infusion was 70 to 149 mg/dL (3.9 to 8.3 mmol/L). Glycemic control and incidence of hypoglycemia for those with renal failure were compared with a historical cohort of critically ill, hyperglycemic trauma patients without renal failure given our conventional RHI algorithm.ResultsTwenty-one patients with renal failure who received the modified RHI algorithm were evaluated and compared with 40 patients without renal failure given our conventional RHI algorithm. Average BG concentration was significantly greater for those with renal failure (133 ± 14 mg/dL or 7.3 ± 0.7 mmol/L) compared with those without renal failure (122 ± 15 mg/dL or 6.8 ± 0.8 mmol/L), respectively (P < 0.01). Patients with renal failure showed worsened glycemic variability, with 16.1 ± 3.3 h/d within the target BG range, 6.9 ± 3.2 h/d above the target BG range, and 1.4 ± 1.1 h/d below the target BG range compared with 19.6 ± 4.7 h/d (P < 0.001), 3.4 ± 3.0 h/d (P < 0.001), and 0.7 ± 0.8 h/d (P < 0.01) for those without renal failure, respectively. Moderate hypoglycemia (<60 mg/dL or <3.3 mmol/L) occurred in 76% of patients with renal failure compared with 35% without renal failure (P < 0.005). Severe hypoglycemia (BG <40 mg/dL or <2.2 mmol/L) occurred in 29% of patients with renal failure compared with none of those without renal failure (P < 0.001).ConclusionDespite receiving a modified RHI infusion, critically ill trauma patients with renal failure are at greater risk for developing hypoglycemia and have more glycemic variability than patients without renal failure.     

Economic burden of hospital admissions for patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections in the United States

ABSTRACT

Objectives: We estimated the total US hospital costs associated with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI) admissions as well as the admissions that may have been potential candidates for outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT).

Methods: We assessed inpatient admissions for ABSSSI from the Premier database (2011–2014), focusing on all admissions of adults with length of stay (LOS) ≥ 1 days and a primary diagnosis of erysipelas, cellulitis/abscess, or wound infection. We performed a detailed analysis of 2014 admissions for patient, treatment, hospital, and economic characteristic variables. Using published selection criteria, we identified a subset of patients admitted in 2014 who may have been potential candidates for OPAT.

Results: We analyzed 277,971 admissions. In 2014, most admissions were for cellulitis without major complications or comorbidities; mean ± SD LOS was 4.0 ± 3.0 days, and total hospital cost per admission was $6400 ± $6874, 54% of which was attributable to room costs. Among 2014 admissions, 14% involved patients with clinical characteristics suggesting that they were consistent with guideline recommendations for exclusive treatment with OPAT. Compared with all admissions in the year, these admissions were of younger patients (aged 50 vs. 55 years), admitted more frequently for cellulitis (90% vs. 70%), with shorter LOS (2.8 ± 1.8 days), and lower mean total hospital cost per admission ($4080 ± $3066).

Conclusions: Admissions for ABSSSI impose a substantial cost to US hospitals, with half of costs attributable to room costs. When extrapolated to all US patients admitted to the hospital for ABSSSI during 2014, had OPAT guidelines been universally followed, admissions may have been reduced by 14%, thereby saving US hospitals $161 million.     

Does enteral nutrition compared to parenteral nutrition result in better outcomes in critically ill adult patients? A systematic review of the literature

OBJECTIVE: Nutritional support is part of the standard of care for the critically ill adult patient. In the average patient in the intensive care unit who has no contraindications to enteral nutrition (EN) or parenteral nutrition (PN), the choice of route for nutritional support may be influenced by several factors. Because EN and PN are associated with risks and benefits, we systematically reviewed and critically appraised the literature to compare EN with PN the critically ill patient. METHODS: We searched computerized bibliographic databases, personal files, and relevant reference lists to identify potentially eligible studies. Only randomized clinical trials that compared EN with PN in critically ill patients with respect to clinically important outcomes were included in this review. In an independent fashion, relevant data on the methodology and outcomes of primary studies were abstracted in duplicate. The studies were subsequently aggregated statistically. RESULTS: There were 13 studies that met the inclusion criteria and, hence, were included in our meta-analysis. The use of EN as opposed to PN was associated with a significant decrease in infectious complications (relative risk = 0.64, 95% confidence interval = 0.47 to 0.87, P = 0.004) but not with any difference in mortality rate (relative risk = 1.08, 95% confidence interval = 0.70 to 1.65, P = 0.7). There was no difference in the number of days on a ventilator or length of stay in the hospital between groups receiving EN or PN (Standardized Mean Difference [SMD] = 0.07, 95% confidence interval = -0.2 to 0.33, P = 0.6). PN was associated with a higher incidence of hyperglycemia. Data that compared days on a ventilator and the development of diarrhea in patients who received EN versus PN were inconclusive. In the EN and PN groups, complications with enteral and parenteral access were seen. Four studies documented cost savings with EN as opposed to PN. CONCLUSION: The use of EN as opposed to PN results in an important decrease in the incidence of infectious complications in the critically ill and may be less costly. EN should be the first choice for nutritional support in the critically ill.     

Glargine Insulin Use Versus Continuous Regular Insulin in Diabetic Surgical Noncritically Ill Patients Receiving Parenteral Nutrition: Randomized Controlled Study

Background: Hyperglycemia is a major complication of parenteral nutrition (PN). Guidelines for hyperglycemia management in noncritically ill patients cite basal insulin administration but do not recommend a regimen. The GLUCOSE‐in‐PN study aimed to compare the efficacy of glargine insulin versus continuously infused regular insulin in PN (RI‐in‐PN) to achieve glycemic control in noncritically ill surgical patients with diabetes who were receiving PN. Methods: This prospective randomized open‐label study was conducted at King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre. Noncritically ill surgical patients with diabetes who were receiving PN were randomized to receive basal glargine insulin or RI‐in‐PN on day 4 of PN support. Mean blood glucose levels were compared on study days 5–9. The percentages of blood glucose measurements at goal were compared between groups. Results: Sixty‐seven PN treatment episodes were analyzed. There were no statistically significant differences in mean glucose levels between groups on any study day (P > .1). Overall glycemic control rates were 52.24% (glargine insulin) and 47.76% (RI‐in‐PN; P = .06). A significantly higher percentage of hyperglycemia was observed on day 5 for glargine insulin versus RI‐in‐PN (22.39% vs 5.97%, P = .0059). Blood glucose measurements indicated 6 hypoglycemic events: 2 for glargine insulin (5.7%) and 4 for RI‐in‐PN (11.4%; P > .1). Conclusion: Both glargine insulin and RI‐in‐PN are effective basal insulin modalities for blood glucose control in noncritically ill surgical patients with diabetes who are receiving PN. Uncontrolled hyperglycemic events occurred more frequently with glargine insulin, and the rate of hypoglycemia was acceptable for both regimens.     

The Impact of Palliative Medicine Consultation on Readmission Rates and Hospital Costs in Surgical Patients Requiring Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation

BackgroundThe use of palliative care for critically ill hospitalized patients has expanded. However, it is still underutilized in surgical specialties. Postsurgical patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation have increased mortality and costs of care; outcomes from adding palliative care services to this population have been poorly investigated. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of palliative medicine consultation on readmission rates and hospitalization costs in postsurgical patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation.MethodsThe Nationwide Readmissions Database was queried for adults (> 18 years) between the years 2010 and 2014 who underwent a major operation (Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project [HCUP] data element ORPROC = 1), required mechanical ventilation for ≥ 96 consecutive hours (ICD-9-CM V46.1), and survived until discharge. Among these, patients who received a palliative medicine consultation during hospitalization were identified using the ICD-9-CM diagnosis code V66.7.ResultsOf 53,450 included patients, 3.4% received a palliative care consultation. Compared to patients who did not receive a palliative care consultation, patients who did receive a consultation had a lower readmission rate (14.8% vs. 24.8%, p < 0.001) and lower average cost of hospitalization during the initial admission ($109,007 vs. $124,218, p < 0.001), findings that persisted after multivariable logistic regression.ConclusionUtilization of palliative care in surgical patients remains low. Palliative care consultation in postsurgical patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation was associated with lower cost and rate of readmission. Further work is needed to integrate palliative care services with surgical care.     

When early enteral feeding is not possible in critically ill patients: results of a multicenter observational study

Background: Early enteral nutrition (EN) is the preferred strategy for feeding the critically ill; however, it is not always possible to initiate EN within the recommended 24 to 48 hours. When these situations arise, controversy exists whether to start feeding early via the parenteral route or to delay feeding until EN can be provided. Methods: A multicenter, international, observational study examined nutrition practices in intensive care units (ICUs). Eligible patients were critically ill patients with a medical diagnosis who remained in the ICU for >72 hours and received EN >48 hours after admission. Data were collected on site, including patient characteristics, daily nutrition practices, and outcomes at 60 days. Nutrition and clinical outcomes were compared between 3 groups of patients: (1) early parenteral nutrition (PN) (<48 hours after admission) and late EN (>48 hours after admission), (2) late PN and late EN, and (3) late EN and no PN. Results: Of the 703 patients who met our inclusion criteria, 541 (77.0%) medical patients received late EN and no PN. In patients receiving late EN and PN, 83 (11.8%) received early PN and 79 (11.2%) received late PN. Adequacy of calories and protein from total nutrition was highest in the early PN group (74.1% ± 21.2% and 71.5% ± 24.9%, respectively) and lowest in the late EN group (42.9% ± 21.2% and 38.7% ± 21.6%) (P < .001). The proportion of patients dead or remaining in hospital was significantly higher for early PN compared with late EN and PN (unadjusted hazard ratio for early PN = 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.37–0.83, P = .015). However, this difference did not remain significant (P = .65) after adjustment for baseline characteristics. Conclusions: The results suggest that initiating PN early, when it is not possible to feed enterally early, may improve provision of calories and protein but is not associated with better clinical outcomes compared with late EN or PN.     

Hypercholesterolemia Dietary and Pharmacotherapy

ABSTRACT

Objectives: To estimate the cost difference associated with tolvaptan treatment vs. fluid restriction (FR) among hospitalized patients with heart failure (HF) and hyponatremia (HN) based on a real-world registry of HN patients.

Methods: An Excel-based economic model was developed to evaluate the cost impact of tolvaptan treatment vs. FR. Model input for hospital length of stay (LOS) was based on published data from the Hyponatremia Registry (HNR). Based on HNR data, tolvaptan-treated patients had a 2-day (median) shorter LOS compared to FR. Real-world effectiveness of tolvaptan treatment from the HNR was applied to a national sample of inpatients visits from the Premier Hospital database to estimate the potential LOS-related cost difference between tolvaptan treatment and FR. A one-way sensitivity and multivariable Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis were conducted.

Results: Economic modeling results of the base-case analysis indicated that among hospitalized patients with HF, the hospital cost per admission, not including HN drug cost, was $3453 lower among patients treated with tolvaptan vs. FR, due to the shorter LOS associated with tolvaptan treatment. At wholesale acquisition cost of $362 per day and an average treatment duration of 3.2 days, the pharmacy cost of tolvaptan treatment per admission was estimated at $1157. Thus, after factoring the decrease in hospital medical costs and increase in pharmacy costs associated with tolvaptan treatment, results indicated a cost-offset opportunity of –$2296 per admission for patients treated with tolvaptan versus FR. Results of the sensitivity analyses were consistent with the base-case analysis.

Limitations: The model derives inputs from real-world observational data. No causal relationship can be inferred from this analysis.

Conclusions: Based on this economic analysis, tolvaptan treatment vs. FR among hospitalized patients with HF and HN may be associated with lower hospital-related costs, which offset the increase in pharmacy costs associated with tolvaptan treatment.     

Effect of Early Nutritional Support on Clinical Outcomes of Critically Ill Patients with Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Single-Center Retrospective Study

The initial nutritional delivery policy for patients with sepsis admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) has not been fully elucidated. We aimed to determine whether an initial adequate nutrition supply and route of nutrition delivery during the first week of sepsis onset improve clinical outcomes of critically ill patients with sepsis. We reviewed adult patients with sepsis and septic shock in the ICU in a single tertiary teaching hospital between 31 November 2013 and 20 May 2017. Poisson log-linear and Cox regressions were performed to assess the relationships between clinical outcomes and sex, modified nutrition risk in the critically ill score, sequential organ failure assessment score, route of nutrition delivery, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation score, and daily energy and protein delivery during the first week of sepsis onset. In total, 834 patients were included. Patients who had a higher protein intake during the first week of sepsis onset had a lower in-hospital mortality (adjusted hazard ratio (HR), 0.55; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.39–0.78; p = 0.001). A higher energy intake was associated with a lower 30-day mortality (adjusted HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.90–0.98; p = 0.003). The route of nutrition delivery was not associated with 1-year mortality in the group which was underfed; however, in patients who met > 70% of their nutritional requirement, enteral feeding (EN) with supplemental parenteral nutrition (PN) was superior to only EN (p = 0.016) or PN (p = 0.042). In patients with sepsis and septic shock, a high daily average protein intake may lower in-hospital mortality, and a high energy intake may lower the 30-day mortality, especially in those with a high modified nutrition risk in the critically ill scores. In patients who receive adequate energy, EN with supplemental PN may be better than only EN or PN, but not in underfed patients.