Carmina Wanden-Berghe1, P Matía Martín2, L M Luengo Pérez3, C Cuerda Compes4, R Burgos Peláez5, J Alvarez Hernández6, A Calleja Fernández7, A Pérez de la Cruz8, C Gómez Candela9, P Leyes García10, L Laborda González11, M A Martínez Olmos12, C Campos Martín13, J P Suárez Llanos14, M A Penacho Lázaro15, M Gonzalo Marín16, J Salas Salvadó17, J A Irles Rocamora18, B Cánovas Gaillemin19, M C Carrero Caballero20, J M Moreno Villares21, C Garde Orbaiz22, N Miserachs Aranda23, M D Del Olmo García24, A Apezetxea Celaya25, S Mauri26. 1. Hospital Clínico San Carlos. Madrid.. carminaw@telefonica.net. 2. Hospital General Universitario de Alicante. Universidad CEU Cardenal Herrera. Elche. Alicante.. 3. Hospital Infanta Cristina. Badajoz.. 4. Hospital Gregorio Marañón. Madrid.. 5. Hospital Vall d'Hebrón. Barcelona.. 6. Hospital Príncipe de Asturias. Alcalá de Henares. Madrid.. 7. Complejo Asistencial de León.. 8. Hospital Virgen de las Nieves. Granada.. 9. Hospital La Paz. Madrid.. 10. Hospital Clinic. Barcelona.. 11. Hospital de Cruces. Bilbao.. 12. Hospital Universitario Santiago de Compostela.. 13. Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena. Sevilla.. 14. Hospital Universitario la Candelaria. Tenerife.. 15. Hospital El Bierzo. Ponferrada. León.. 16. Hospital Carlos Haya. Madrid.. 17. Hospital Universitari Sant Joan de Reus. Tarragona.. 18. Hospital Universitario Ntra. Sra. de Valme.. 19. Hospital Virgen de la Salud. Toledo.. 20. Hospital Ramón y Cajal. Madrid.. 21. Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre. Madrid.. 22. Hospital Donostia. San Sebastián.. 23. Hospital Fundació Esperit Sant. Santa Coloma de Gramanet. Barcelona.. 24. Hospital Universitario Severo Ochoa. Leganés. Madrid.. 25. Hospital Basurto. Bilbao.. 26. Hospital Josep Trueta. Girona. Spain..
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the results of the home enteral nutrition (HEN) registry of the NADYA-SENPE group in 2011 and 2012. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrieved the data of the patients recorded from January 1st 2011 to December 31st 2012. RESULTS: There were 3021 patients in the registry during the period from 29 hospitals, which gives 65.39 per million inhabitants. 97.95% were adults, 51.4% male. Mean age was 67.64 ± 19.1, median age was 72 years for adults and 7 months for children. Median duration with HEN was 351 days and for 97.5% was their first event with HEN. Most patients had HEN because of neurological disease (57.8%). Access route was nasogastric tube for 43.5% and gastrostomy for 33.5%. Most patients had limited activity level and, concerning autonomy, 54.8% needed total help. Nutritional formula was supplied from chemist's office to 73.8% of patients and disposables, when necessary, was supplied from hospitals to 53.8% of patients. HEN was finished for 1,031 patients (34.1%) during the period of study, 56.6% due to decease and 22.2% due to recovery of oral intake. CONCLUSIONS: Data from NADYA-SENPE registry must be explained cautiously because it is a non-compulsory registry. In spite of the change in the methodology of the registry in 2010, tendencies regarding HEN have been maintained, other than oral route. Copyright AULA MEDICA EDICIONES 2014. Published by AULA MEDICA. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the results of the home enteral nutrition (HEN) registry of the NADYA-SENPE group in 2011 and 2012. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrieved the data of the patients recorded from January 1st 2011 to December 31st 2012. RESULTS: There were 3021 patients in the registry during the period from 29 hospitals, which gives 65.39 per million inhabitants. 97.95% were adults, 51.4% male. Mean age was 67.64 ± 19.1, median age was 72 years for adults and 7 months for children. Median duration with HEN was 351 days and for 97.5% was their first event with HEN. Most patients had HEN because of neurological disease (57.8%). Access route was nasogastric tube for 43.5% and gastrostomy for 33.5%. Most patients had limited activity level and, concerning autonomy, 54.8% needed total help. Nutritional formula was supplied from chemist's office to 73.8% of patients and disposables, when necessary, was supplied from hospitals to 53.8% of patients. HEN was finished for 1,031 patients (34.1%) during the period of study, 56.6% due to decease and 22.2% due to recovery of oral intake. CONCLUSIONS: Data from NADYA-SENPE registry must be explained cautiously because it is a non-compulsory registry. In spite of the change in the methodology of the registry in 2010, tendencies regarding HEN have been maintained, other than oral route. Copyright AULA MEDICA EDICIONES 2014. Published by AULA MEDICA. All rights reserved.