No abstract

This guideline will inform physicians, nurses, dieticians, pharmacists, caregivers and other home enteral nutrition (HEN) providers about the indications and contraindications for HEN, and its implementation and monitoring. Home parenteral nutrition is not included but will be addressed in a separate ESPEN guideline. This guideline will also inform interested patients requiring HEN. The guideline is based on current evidence and expert opinion and consists of 61 recommendations that address the indications for HEN, relevant access devices and their use, the products recommended, the monitoring and criteria for termination of HEN, and the structural requirements needed to perform HEN. We searched for metaanalyses, systematic reviews and single clinical trials based on clinical questions according to the PICO format. The evidence was evaluated and used to develop clinical recommendations implementing the SIGN method. The guideline was commissioned and financially supported by ESPEN and the members of the guideline group were selected by ESPEN.

Despite the methodological difficulties in creating non-disease specific guidelines, the evidence behind several important aspects of nutritional support for polymorbid medical inpatients was reviewed and summarized into practical clinical recommendations. Use of these guidelines offer an evidence-based nutritional approach to the polymorbid medical inpatient and may improve their outcomes.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose. To review microbial contamination rates about preparation of individual and batch doses using aseptic techniques within pharmaceutical (controlled) and clinical (ward and theatre) environments. Methods. Systematic review, involving amalgamation of data using a random effect model and metaanalysis. Results. A total of 19 studies from 17 reports (7277 doses), mostly single arm studies, were identified for analysis. The overall contamination rates for doses prepared in clinical environments were found to be 5.0% (95% CI; 1.8%, 13.1%, n = 8 studies) for individual doses and 2.0% (95% CI; 0.3%, 13.1%; n = 5) for doses prepared as part of a batch. Rates for doses prepared in pharmaceutical environments were found to be 1.9% (95% CI; 0.8%, 4.2%; n = 5) for individual doses and 0.0% (95% CI; 0.0%, 0.8%; n= 1) for doses prepared as part of a batch. The results indicate greater overall contamination rates of doses prepared in clinical than pharmaceutical environments, in those prepared individually than in batch preparation, and in those in which additions rather than no additions were made. Significant differences were only found between pharmaceutical and clinical environments for batch doses, and between batch and individual doses prepared in a pharmaceutical environment. The studies differed substantially in sample size, interventions and comparison conditions, especially in the clinical setting. The quality of the data was judged to be low. Conclusion. Contamination rates in clinical and pharmaceutical environments were commonly found to be unacceptably high. Intuitive recommendations for reducing contamination rates by carrying out the procedures in a pharmaceutical environment using batch doses are supported by an evidence base that needs to be strengthened further. ________________________________________________________________________________

Please cite this article as: Austin PD, Hand KS, Elia M, Systematic review and meta-analysis of the risk of microbial contamination of parenteral doses prepared under aseptic techniques in clinical and pharmaceutical environments: an update, Journal of Hospital Infection (2015),

No abstract