ReviewNutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition2025
Quality improvement for parenteral nutrition in hospital: Applying a gap analysis to an electronic health record to review parenteral nutrition processing.
Review in Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Parenteral nutrition practice in the United States: A cross-sectional survey with gap analysis.JPEN. Journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition · 2026Article
- Quality improvement for parenteral nutrition in hospital: Applying a gap analysis to an electronic health record to review parenteral nutrition processing.Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn light of the complex and high-risk nature of parenteral nutrition (PN), reviewing PN processing steps is essential to minimize patient harm. The main steps include ordering, verification, compounding, and administration. Electronic health records (EHRs) have become increasingly utilized and can play a critical role in enhancing the safety of PN processin. Epic EHR is used throughout all PN processing steps within our health system. There is limited literature on health system quality improvement initiatives in PN processing.
methodsWe reviewed the steps of PN processing in our health region and applied a gap analysis to assess Epic's functionality in PN processing. This gap analysis aimed to identify opportunities to enhance PN safety.
resultsEpic applies 32 of 40 functions that enhance PN safety. We selected three functions to prioritize adding into future EHR iterations; these include (1) bidirectional automatic interfacing between the automated compounding device and EHR reflecting real-time updates on product availability/shortages, (2) automatically transmitting a pharmacist-modified PN order back to the prescriber for approval, and (3) adding additional clinical decision support tools, one of which is incorporating a 3-in-1 qualification calculator and the second is requiring prescriber justification for using compounded formulations over multichamber bags. Additional opportunities for improving safety in PN processing were identified and added to the gap analysis.
conclusionUsing a gap analysis is a simple process to review a health system's EHR to identify opportunities to enhance patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.