Abstract
Introduction: The evaluation of health technologies
applied to the selection of a module of protein for
hospital use, aims to provide support in choosing products
cost effective and safe, in order to facilitate decision
making to the different actors involved in the
choice of therapeutic alternatives recommended in patients
with elevated protein needs, as is the case in this
investigation.
Aims: To apply a mathematical method - to evaluate
multi-protein modules available on the market for institutional
nutritional therapy.
Methods: Two phases are established, a review of
the literature to establish and prioritize technical evaluation
criteria of different modules offers protein, and
two application of a mathematical model was developed
to consider the protein module for use within hospital
institutions, which consisted of assigning a value
to each of the variables through an established semantic
differential scale, which allowed calculating the percentage
weight of each of the variables whose sum
throw percentage score for each alternative.
Results: Regarding the search for technical evaluation
criteria for different protein modules deals in the
following literature, nature or equivalence conditions of
administration and use, safety, and efficacy were identified.
Nature is self assessed by rating the chemical
amino acid score corrected for protein digestibility (PDCAAS)
weighing in assessing 39.05%, referring to the
terms of use and management took into account factors
included in the distribution systems unit dose with
a weight of 27.61%, the efficiency was defined by the
protein efficiency ratio (PER) which impacts the 19.53%
of the grade and ultimately the safety criterion 13.81%
with respect to packaging and labeling.
Discussion: There is agreement with that reported
in the literature concerning the technical evaluation criteria
relevant to the quality of the protein, and the criteria
of administration, safety and efficacy. Similarly to
conduct triage criteria using the mathematical model in
order to consider the protein module for use within hospital
facilities, the measure PDCAAS nature, remains
the most important when choosing a protein module.
However, the total protein content and solubility are
similar in all the tested products.
Conclusions: When evaluating four alternative protein
modules, offered by different pharmaceutical companies,
the highest score corresponding to the alternative
with a higher rating than 90%, the obtained two
alternative protein modules for use in hospitals, which
contain whey protein and amino acids in combinations.
applied to the selection of a module of protein for
hospital use, aims to provide support in choosing products
cost effective and safe, in order to facilitate decision
making to the different actors involved in the
choice of therapeutic alternatives recommended in patients
with elevated protein needs, as is the case in this
investigation.
Aims: To apply a mathematical method - to evaluate
multi-protein modules available on the market for institutional
nutritional therapy.
Methods: Two phases are established, a review of
the literature to establish and prioritize technical evaluation
criteria of different modules offers protein, and
two application of a mathematical model was developed
to consider the protein module for use within hospital
institutions, which consisted of assigning a value
to each of the variables through an established semantic
differential scale, which allowed calculating the percentage
weight of each of the variables whose sum
throw percentage score for each alternative.
Results: Regarding the search for technical evaluation
criteria for different protein modules deals in the
following literature, nature or equivalence conditions of
administration and use, safety, and efficacy were identified.
Nature is self assessed by rating the chemical
amino acid score corrected for protein digestibility (PDCAAS)
weighing in assessing 39.05%, referring to the
terms of use and management took into account factors
included in the distribution systems unit dose with
a weight of 27.61%, the efficiency was defined by the
protein efficiency ratio (PER) which impacts the 19.53%
of the grade and ultimately the safety criterion 13.81%
with respect to packaging and labeling.
Discussion: There is agreement with that reported
in the literature concerning the technical evaluation criteria
relevant to the quality of the protein, and the criteria
of administration, safety and efficacy. Similarly to
conduct triage criteria using the mathematical model in
order to consider the protein module for use within hospital
facilities, the measure PDCAAS nature, remains
the most important when choosing a protein module.
However, the total protein content and solubility are
similar in all the tested products.
Conclusions: When evaluating four alternative protein
modules, offered by different pharmaceutical companies,
the highest score corresponding to the alternative
with a higher rating than 90%, the obtained two
alternative protein modules for use in hospitals, which
contain whey protein and amino acids in combinations.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 16 - 23 |
Number of pages | 8 |
Journal | Nutricion Clinica y Dietetica Hospitalaria |
Volume | 35 |
Issue number | 1 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 2015 |