ArticleJPEN. Journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition2026
Parenteral nutrition practice in the United States: A cross-sectional survey with gap analysis.
Article in JPEN. Journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundParenteral nutrition is a high-alert medication with the potential for errors that result in patient harm. The American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition has published guidance to support safe parenteral nutrition practices; however, the current implementation of this guidance or improvement in clinical practice over time remains unknown.
methodsA cross-sectional survey on current parenteral nutrition practice was distributed to US-based clinicians. Survey items addressed multiple steps in the parenteral nutrition use process. Descriptive statistics were performed and presented as number and percentage of respondents.
resultsA total of 1160 participants were included. Critical safety gaps included: prescribing practices that lack standardization and do not align with guidance; inadequate storage practices between compounding and administration; lack of adherence to specific filter type guidance; lack of adherence to the maximum hang time of separate lipid injectable emulsion infusions; limited oversight; minimal quality improvement activities; inadequate evaluation of errors; and pervasive unawareness of key institutional parenteral nutrition practices. Practice improvements included greater adoption of safety technologies and an increased use of filters during administration.
conclusionThis survey of current parenteral nutrition practice reveals some improvements in clinical practice; however, it highlights several critical gaps in the adoption of guidance with ongoing unsafe practices, which can result in patient harm.
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.