Standardized versus custom parenteral nutrition: Impact on clinical and cost-related outcomes

Purpose. Results of a study comparing clinical and cost outcomes with the use of standardized versus custom-prepared parenteral nutrition (PN) in an acute care setting are reported. Methods. In a retrospective pre-post analysis, nutritional target attainment, electrolyte abnormalities, and other outcomes were compared in patients 15 years of age or older who received custom PN (n = 49) or a standardized PN product (n = 57) for at least 72 hours at a large medical center over a 13-month period; overall, 45% of the cases were intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. A time-and-motion assessment was conducted to determine PN preparation times. Results. There were no significant between-group differences in the percentage of patients who achieved estimated caloric requirements or in mean ICU or hospital length of stay. However, patients who received standardized PN were significantly less likely than those who received custom PN to achieve the highest protein intake goal (63% versus 92%, p = 0.003) and more likely to develop hyponatremia (37% versus 14%,p = 0.01). Pharmacy preparation times averaged 20 minutes for standardized PN and 80 minutes for custom PN; unit. costs were $61.06 and $57.84, respectively. Conclusion. A standardized PN formulation was as effective as custom PN in achieving estimated caloric requirements, but it was relatively less effective in achieving 90% of estimated protein requirements and was associated with a higher frequency of hyponatremia. The standardized PN product may be a cost-effective formulation for institutions preparing an average of five or fewer PN orders per day.