Download PDF
Aktuelle Ernährungsmedizin 2012; 37(03): 126-133
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1304940
Originalarbeit
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

The Health Economic Impact of Oral Nutritional Supplements (ONS) in Germany

Gesundheitsökonomische Analyse der medizinischen Trinknahrungen in Deutschland
M. Nuijten
1   Ars Accessus Medica, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
,
T. Mittendorf
2   Herescon GmbH, Hannover, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
01 June 2012 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the health economic impact of oral nutritional supplement (ONS), being a medical nutrition product in the community setting in Germany in 2007.

Methods: This health economic analysis is based on a comparison of the use of ONS versus no use of ONS in patients, who are eligible for ONS due to (risk of) disease-related malnutrition (DRM). The costs of the two treatment strategies, “ONS” versus “no ONS” were assessed using a linear decision analytic model reflecting cost functions related with DRM. Data sources are based on the published literature, clinical trials, official national price/tariff lists and national population statistics.

Results: This study shows that the extra costs for ONS (€ 534) are off-set by a reduction of hospitalisation costs (€ 768) leading to total cost savings of € 234 per patient. A scenario analysis based on length of hospital stays and per diem costing instead of DRG costs shows that the extra costs for ONS (€ 534) are also off-set by a reduction of hospitalisation costs (€ 791) leading to cost savings of € 257 per patient. Additional scenarios showed similar and consistent results.

Conclusions: This health economic analysis shows that the use of ONS leads to cost savings for the cost of DRM in Germany in the community setting. In addition the use of ONS leads also to better clinical outcomes due to a reduction of hospitalisations. As a consequence the use of ONS might be considered cost-effective at a patient and also a population level, which could be shown also in extensive sensitivity analyses.

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund: Durchführung einer gesundheitsökonomischen Analyse zur medizinischen Trinknahrung im Behandlungsalltag in Deutschland für 2007.

Methoden: Diese gesundheitsökonomische Analyse basiert auf dem Vergleich einer Intervention mit Trinknahrung vs. ohne diese Ergänzung bei Patienten, die aufgrund von krankheitsbedingten Risikofaktoren ein erhöhtes Risiko aufweisen, eine Mangelernährung auszubilden oder bereits eine ausgebildet haben. Die Kosten beider Strategien werden mittels eines linearen Entscheidungsmodells miteinander verglichen. Datenquellen sind dabei Erkenntnisse der bestehenden Literatur, klinische Studien, offizielle Statistiken sowie offizielle Preistabellen für die Abrechnung innerhalb der Sozialversicherung.

Ergebnis: Die Studie zeigt, dass die zusätzlichen Kosten für die Nahrungsergänzung (€ 534) von Einsparungen im Krankenhaus (€ 768) mehr als aufgewogen werden und zu Einsparungen von durchschnittlich € 234 pro Patient führen. Eine Szenarioanalyse, die anstatt DRG Tagesvergütungen für Krankenhäuser einsetzt, führt zu einem ähnlichen Ergebnis mit Einsparungen von € 257 pro Patient. Weitere Szenarien führten zu ebenfalls konsistenten Ergebnissen.

Zusammenfassung: Diese gesundheitsökonomische Studie hat gezeigt, dass der Einsatz von Trinknahrungsinterventionen zu Kosteneinsparungen innerhalb des Behandlungsalltags in Deutschland führen kann. Zusätzlich sind durch den Einsatz positive Effekte auf den klinischen Zustand einzelner Patienten sowie eine Reduzierung von Krankenhausaufenthalten zu erwarten. Somit kann die Gabe von Trinknahrungsmitteln auf Patienten- als auch auf Populationsebene als kosteneffektive Intervention betrachtet werden.

Keywords

Oral Nutritional Supplement, ONS - malnutrition - cost analyses - Germany

Schlüsselwörter

Trinknahrung - ONS - Mangelernährung - Kostenanalyse - Deutschland
 

  • References

  • 1 Löser C. Malnutrition in hospital – the clinical and economic implications. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2010; 107: 911-991
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Naber TH, Schermer T, de Bree A et al. Prevalence of DRM in nonsurgical hospitalized patients and its association with disease complications. Am J Clin Nutr 1997; 66: 1232-1239
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Elia M, Stratton RJ, Russell C, Green CJ, Pang F. The cost of disease-related malnutrition in the UK and economic considerations for the use of oral nutritional supplements (ONS) in adults. Redditch: BAPEN; 2005
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Kaiser MJ, Bauer JM, Rämsch C et al. Mini Nutritional Assessment International Group. Frequency of malnutrition in older adults: a multinational perspective using the mini nutritional assessment. J Am Geriatr Soc 2010; 58: 1734-1738
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Volkert D, Sieber CC. Mangelernährung in der Geriatrie. Aktuel Ernahrungsmed 2011; 36:  175-190
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Volkert D, Pauly L, Stehle P et al. Prevalence of malnutrition in orally and tube-fed elderly nursing home residents in Germany and its relation to health complaints and dietary intake. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2011; 2011 247315. Epub 2011 May 19
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Halfens RJG, Meijers JMM, Neyens JCL, Offermans MPJ. Rapportage Resultaten: Landelijke Prevalentiemeting Zorgproblemen 2008. Maastricht: Universiteit Maastricht; 09/2008
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Odlund Olin A, Koochek A, Ljungqvist O et al. Nutritional status, well-being and functional ability in frail elderly service flat residents. Eur J Clin Nutr 2005; 59: 263-270
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Gollub EA, Weddle DO. Improvements in nutritional intake and quality of life among frail homebound older adults receiving home-delivered breakfast and lunch. J Am Diet Assoc 2004; 104: 1227-1235
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Müller MC, Uedelhofen KW, Wiedemann UCH. CEPTON-Studie: Mangelernährung in Deutschland. Erlangen: Bressler Druck; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Ljungqvist O, de Man F. Under nutrition – a major health problem in Europe. Nutr Hosp 2009; 24: 368-370
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Elia M, Russell C. Combating Malnutrition: Recommendations for action. Report from the Group on Malnutrition, Led by BAPEN. Redditch: BAPEN; 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Russell C, Elia M. Nutrition Screening Survey in the UK in 2008: Hospitals, Care Homes and Mental Health Units. Redditch: BAPEN; 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Stratton RJ, Elia M. Who benefits from nutritional support: what is the evidence?. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007; 19: 353-358
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Martyn CN, Winter PD, Coles SJ et al. Effect of nutritional status on use of health care resources by patients with chronic disease living in the community. Clin Nutr 1998; 17: 119-123
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Correia MI, Waitzberg DL. The impact of malnutrition on morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay and costs evaluated through a multivariate model analysis. Clin Nutr 2003; 22: 235-239
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Milne AC, Potter J, Vivanti A, Avenell A. Protein and energy supplementation in elderly people at risk from malnutrition. The Cochrane Collaboration. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Russell CA. The impact of DRM on healthcare costs and economic considerations for the use of oral nutritional supplements. Clin Nutr Suppl 2007; 2: 25-32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Potter JM. Oral supplements in the elderly. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 2001; 4: 21-28
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Stratton RJ, Green CJ, Elia M. Disease-related DRM: an evidenced based approach to treatment. Oxford: CABI Publishing; 2003
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Stratton RJ, Elia M. A review of reviews: A new look at the evidence for oral nutritional supplements in clinical practice. Clin Nutr Suppl 2007; 2: 5-23
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Pritchard C. Enteral nutrition and oral nutrition supplements: A review of the economics literature. JPEN 2006; 30: 52-59
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Tan SS, Koopmanschap M. The cost of disease related DRM and the cost-effectiveness of nutrition interventions: a feasibility study for The Netherlands. Data on file, 2007
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Amaral TF, Matos LC, Tavares MM et al. The economic impact of disease-related malnutrition at hospital admission. Clin Nutr 2007; 26: 778-784
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Kruizenga HM, van Tulder MW, Seidell JC et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of early screening and treatment of malnourished patients. Am J Clin Nutr 2005; 82: 1082-1089
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Norman K, Kirchner H, Freudenreich M et al. Three month intervention with protein and energy rich supplements improve muscle function and quality of life in malnourished patients with non-neoplastic gastrointestinal disease-a randomized controlled trial. Clin Nutr 2008; 27: 48-56
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Freijer K, Nuijten MJC. Analysis of the health economic impact of medical nutrition in the Netherlands. EJCN 2010; 64: 1229-1234
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Simmons SF, Zhuo X, Keeler E. Cost-effectiveness of nutrition interventions in nursing home residents: a pilot intervention. J Nutr Health Aging 2010; 14: 367-372
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Weinstein MC, Fineberg HV. Clinical decision Analysis. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co; 1980
    Google Scholar
  • 30 http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/
    PubMed
  • 31 Nuijten MJ, Mittendorf T, Persson U. Practical issues in handling data input and uncertainty in a budget impact analysis. Eur J Health Econ 2011; 12: 231-241
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Gariballa S, Forster S, Walters S et al. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of nutritional supplementation during acute illness. Am J Med 2006; 119: 693-699
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar