• D de Luis Román, R Aller de la Puente, J de Luis Román, L A Cuéllar Olmedo, M C Terroba Larumbe, and O Izaola Jauregui.
• Sección de Endocrinología y Nutrición Clínica. Hospital del Río Hortega. Valladolid. Instituto de Endocrinología y Nutrición Clínica. Facultad de Medicina. Valladolid. Spain. Dadluis@yahoo.es
• Rev Clin Esp. 2003 Jul 1; 203 (7): 317-20.

IntroductionStudies on the analysis of direct costs generated by household enteral nutrition (HEN) have been scant. The objective of our study was to carry out a direct costs analysis of household enteral nutrition using both the biochemical and nutritional monitoring values of the nutritional state as a point of reference.Material And MethodsSince January 1999 until December 2001, we studied a total sample of 102 consecutive patients with indication of household nutritional support. The following epidemiological data were obtained in all patients: age, sex, and primary condition for which enteral nutrition was prescribed; we carried out an anthropometric assessment and a biochemical nutritional assessment quarterly. We recorded also the number of episodes of diarrhea, vomiting, aspiration pneumonia, and death during the treatment.ResultsAverage age of the patients was 58.7 13.3 years. The number and proportion of patients according to primary conditions were the following: 71 (69.3%) with head and neck cancer, 14 (13.9%) with a neurological condition with swallowing disturbance (stroke and/or dementia), 6 (5.9%) with tumors in other locations, and 11 (10.9%) with a group of diseases associated with dysphagia or anorexia. HEN was administered by oral route in 81 patients (79.4%), by nasogastric tube (NGT) in 15 patients (14.7%), by PEG in 5 patients (4.9%) and by yeyunostomy in 1 patient (1%). Average duration of HEN was 101 46.9 days. We showed a significant improvement of biochemical and anthropometric parameters in patients with HEN. The economic analysis of direct costs generated by enteral nutrition showed that the total average cost of nutritional formulas and expendable equipment utilized (holders, probes and nutritional tubes) was 300,033 599,203 pesetas/full treatment/patient (1,803 3,601 euros), or a daily average cost of 2,970 5,932 pesetas/day/patient (17.8 35.6 euros). In the analysis of costs acording to different items, the expendable equipment (nutritional tubes, nasogastric tubes and nutritional formula holders) were an average of 1,284 4,571 pesetas/full treatment/patient (7.7 27.4 euros) (5% in total), and the nutritional preparations were an average of 231,313 399,756 pesetas/full treatment/patient (1,390.2 2,402 euros) (95%). The patients with greater resources expenditure were those with tumors of head and neck. In order to analyze the efficiency of this treatment an analysis of costs was carried out for each objective parameter indicating nutritional status improvement; that way, the increase of 1 g/dl of albumin was an average cost of 103,817 2,897 pesetas (623.9 17.4 euros), while the increase of 1 kg of weight was an average cost of 857,237 25,097 pesetas (5,152.1 150.8 euros). CONCLUSIONS. In summary, nutrition enteral household was an effective therapy for nutritional status improvement in different groups of ambulatory patients. The cost of the nutritional support was superior in the group of patients with tumors of the upper aereodigestive system because of the greater duration of the treatment and the complex access route.

15 keywords...

hide…