REVIEWThe impact of home parenteral nutrition on daily life—A review
Introduction
Parenteral nutrition is a lifesaving therapy in patients with severe intestinal failure. Most frequently, this failure results from extensive resections of small bowel due to inflammatory bowel disease or mesenteric thrombosis, or it is caused by loss of function because of severe motility disorders.
Total parenteral nutrition (TPN) implies that a complete aqueous food formulation is administered intravenously. Generally, TPN is administered overnight for a period of 12 h. Patients feed two to seven times a week, depending on their remaining gut function. Importantly, these patients do not choose TPN out of their own free will, but it is usually the ultimate remaining option to maintain or improve their nutritional status.
In patients with prolonged intestinal failure, parenteral nutrition may be administered in the home setting. Home parenteral nutrition (HPN) is nowadays a commonly used procedure in many developed countries.1 The patient population receiving HPN is small, but growing steadily.
Moving parenteral nutrition support from the hospital to the domestic setting results in a significant gain in quality of life.2 However, patients have to face complex technological nutritional support issues at home, which will inevitably influence their personal life. HPN administration is a time consuming and intrusive procedure that requires many adjustments. Besides, the underlying disease that led to intestinal failure may also cause a variety of physical complaints, due to the presence of a stoma, altered body image, etc. These factors frequently impose restrictions on daily life regarding social, physical and psychological function. Understanding the difficulties that these patients experience is crucial in order to offer the right modalities of support. Besides, these notions may help patients as well as health care workers to anticipate to problems in the future.
The aim of the present study was to identify the implications of HPN on the quality of life (QoL), including somatic, psychological, and social aspects of daily life, as experienced by patients, as well as to describe the caregiver's reactions regarding these notions.
Section snippets
Inclusion of studies
A systematic review of the literature was conducted. The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (Cinahl), Medline and Psychlit databases were searched for relevant studies published in between 1965 and 2005. Subject-specific keywords used to describe patients relevant for this review were selected by using the databases’ thesaurus function. We used the following keywords: home parenteral nutrition, successively combined with: depression, anxiety, QoL, psychological, social,
Selected studies
The search of Medline, PsycInfo, and Cinahl databases provided a total of 661 hits (duplicates included). After selecting studies by reading the abstracts, 43 studies remained. Twenty-three of these were excluded because inclusion criteria were not met. Nine of these did not describe original research, seven only reported on medical treatment and complications, two concerned patients with AIDS and cancer, one described hospital TPN patients, one discussed only appetite factors, one evaluated
Discussion
The aim of this study was to identify the impact of HPN on daily life as described in literature. We found that, overall, HPN patients experience a moderate to good QoL, but many suffer from depression and fatigue. HPN also limits social activities. Caregivers reported their overall QoL as similar to the norms that are published for other healthy populations, but common problems like depression and fatigue were articulated.
This review was conducted in a systematic and meticulous manner. In
Conclusion/recommendations
Both qualitative and quantitative studies provided information on symptoms experienced while receiving HPN. In general, it has become clear that HPN patients suffer from a broad range of problems, of which many are social or psychological in nature. Frequently expressed problems were depression, anxiety, limitations in social activities and travelling, sexual problems, fatigue, and diarrhoea.
To minimise the impact of HPN, patients could be supported in coping with these problems from the time
References (32)
- et al.
The SF-36 instrument for the follow-up of health-related quality-of-life assessment of patients undergoing home parenteral nutrition for benign disease
Transplant Proc
(2004) - et al.
Quality of life and concerns in patients with short bowel syndrome
Clin Nutr
(2003) - et al.
Safety and efficacy of home parenteral nutrition for chronic intestinal failure: a 16-year experience at a single centre
Dig Liver Dis
(2003) - et al.
Home parenteral nutrition in the United Kingdom and Ireland
Lancet
(1986) - et al.
The need for a nutrition-related quality-of-life measure
J Am Diet Assoc
(2003) - et al.
Home parenteral nutrition for the management of chronic intestinal failure: a 34 patient-year experience
Ital J Gastroenterol
(1993) - et al.
Quality of life of patients on long-term total parenteral nutrition at home
J Gen Intern Med
(1986) - et al.
Home parenteral nutrition: does affiliation with a national support and educational organization improve patient outcomes?
J Parenter Enteral Nutr
(2002) - et al.
Quality of life after small intestinal transplantation and among home parenteral nutrition patients
J Parenter Enteral Nutr
(1998) - et al.
Quality of life of patients after intestinal transplantation
Transplantation
(1998)