Quality of life in patients receiving home parenteral nutrition

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMSQuality of life is an important determinant of the effectiveness of health technologies, but it has rarely been assessed in patients receiving home parenteral nutrition (HPN).PATIENTS/METHODSThe non-disease specific sickness impact profile (SIP) and the disease specific inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire (IBDQ) were used on a cohort of 49 patients receiving HPN, and the results compared with those for 36 non-HPN patients with either anatomical (<200 cm) or functional (faecal energy excretion >2.0 MJ/day (∼488 kcal/day)) short bowel.RESULTSIn the HPN patients the SIP scores were worse (higher) overall (17 (13)%v 8 (9)%) and with regard to physical (13 (15)% v 5 (8)%) and psychosocial (14 (12)% v 9 (11)%) dimensions and independent categories (20 (12)% v 9 (8)%) compared with the non-HPN patients (means (SD); all p<0.001). The IBDQ scores were worse (lower) in the HPN patients overall (5.0 (4.3–5.7)v 5.6 (4.8–6.2)) and with regard to systemic symptoms (3.8 (2.8–5.4) v 5.2 (3.9–5.9)) and emotional (5.3 (4.4–6.2) v5.8 (5.4–6.4)) and social (4.3 (3.4–5.5) v4.8 (4.5–5.8)) function (median (25–75%); all p<0.05), but only tended to be worse with regard to bowel symptoms (5.2 (4.8–6.1)v 5.7 (4.9–6.4), p = 0.08). HPN also reduced quality of life in patients with a stoma, whereas a stoma did not reduce quality of life among the non-HPN patients. Female HPN patients and HPN patients older than 45 scored worse.CONCLUSIONQuality of life is reduced in patients on HPN compared with those with anatomical or functional short bowel not receiving HPN, and compares with that reported for patients with chronic renal failure treated by dialysis.