Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2013
Impact of clinical pharmacist-based parenteral nutrition service for bone marrow transplantation patients: a randomized clinical trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mousavi Maryam, Hayatshahi Alireza, Sarayani Amir, Hadjibabaie Molouk, Javadi Mohammadreza, Torkamandi Hassan, Gholami Kheirollah, Ghavamzadeh Ardeshir
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Parenteral nutrition (PN) is a well-documented supportive care which maintains the nutritional status of patients. Clinical pharmacists are often involved in providing PN services; however, few studies have investigated the effect of a clinical pharmacy-based PN service in resource-limited settings.
METHODS: We designed a randomized clinical trial to compare the clinical pharmacist-based PN service (intervention group) with the conventional method (control group) for adult patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in Shariati Hospital, Tehran, Iran (2011-2012). In the intervention group, the clinical pharmacists implemented standard guidelines of nutrition support. The conventional method was a routine nutrition support protocol which was pursued for all patients in the bone marrow transplantation wards. Main study outcomes included nutritional status (weight, albumin, total protein, pre-albumin, and nitrogen balance), length of hospital stay, time to engraftment, rate of graft versus host disease, and mortality rate. Patients were followed for 3 months.
RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients were randomly allocated to a study group. The overall intake (oral and parenteral) in the control group was significantly lower than standard daily needed calories (P < 0.01). Patients in the intervention group received fewer days of PN (10.7 ± 4.2 vs. 18.4 ± 5.5 days, P < 0.01). All nutritional outcomes were either preserved or improved in the intervention group while the nutritional status in the control group was deteriorated (P values < 0.01). Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the intervention group (P < 0.01). Regarding PN complications, hyperglycemia was observed more frequently in the intervention group (34.5 %, P = 0.01). Two patients in the control group expired due to graft versus host disease at the 3-month follow-up.
CONCLUSION: A clinical pharmacist-based nutrition support service significantly improved nutritional status and clinical outcomes in comparison with the suboptimal conventional method. Future studies should assess the cost effectiveness of clinical pharmacists' PN services.
METHODS: We designed a randomized clinical trial to compare the clinical pharmacist-based PN service (intervention group) with the conventional method (control group) for adult patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in Shariati Hospital, Tehran, Iran (2011-2012). In the intervention group, the clinical pharmacists implemented standard guidelines of nutrition support. The conventional method was a routine nutrition support protocol which was pursued for all patients in the bone marrow transplantation wards. Main study outcomes included nutritional status (weight, albumin, total protein, pre-albumin, and nitrogen balance), length of hospital stay, time to engraftment, rate of graft versus host disease, and mortality rate. Patients were followed for 3 months.
RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients were randomly allocated to a study group. The overall intake (oral and parenteral) in the control group was significantly lower than standard daily needed calories (P < 0.01). Patients in the intervention group received fewer days of PN (10.7 ± 4.2 vs. 18.4 ± 5.5 days, P < 0.01). All nutritional outcomes were either preserved or improved in the intervention group while the nutritional status in the control group was deteriorated (P values < 0.01). Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the intervention group (P < 0.01). Regarding PN complications, hyperglycemia was observed more frequently in the intervention group (34.5 %, P = 0.01). Two patients in the control group expired due to graft versus host disease at the 3-month follow-up.
CONCLUSION: A clinical pharmacist-based nutrition support service significantly improved nutritional status and clinical outcomes in comparison with the suboptimal conventional method. Future studies should assess the cost effectiveness of clinical pharmacists' PN services.