| Title |
Cost and effectiveness of omega-3 fatty acid supplementation in Chinese ICU patients receiving parenteral nutrition
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ceor.s81277 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Guo Hao Wu, Jian Gao, Chun Yan Ji, Lorenzo Pradelli, Qiu Lei Xi, Qiu Lin Zhuang |
| Abstract |
Clinical evidence supports the use of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA)-enriched lipid emulsions in place of standard lipid emulsions in parenteral nutrition (PN) for intensive care unit (ICU) patients, but uptake may be limited by higher costs. We compared clinical and economic outcomes for these two types of lipid emulsion in the Chinese ICU setting. We developed a pharmacoeconomic discrete event simulation model, based on efficacy data from an international meta-analysis and patient characteristics, resource consumption, and unit costs from a Chinese institutional setting. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken to assess the effects of uncertainty around input parameters. Model predictive validity was assessed by comparing results with data observed in a patient subset not used in the modeling. The model predicted that omega-3 PUFA-enriched emulsion (Omegaven(®) 10% fish oil emulsion) would dominate standard lipid emulsions, with better clinical outcomes and lower overall health care costs (mean savings ~10,000 RMB), mainly as a result of faster recovery and shorter hospital stay (by ~6.5 days). The external validation process confirmed the reliability of the model predictions. Omega-3 PUFA-enriched lipid emulsions improved clinical outcome and decreased overall costs in Chinese ICU patients requiring PN. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 20% |
| Other | 4 | 16% |
| Researcher | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 12% |
| Librarian | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 5 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 28% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Engineering | 2 | 8% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 8 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 July 2017.
All research outputs
#7,993,771
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#181
of 525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,489
of 281,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#6
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 281,588 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.