PD453 - ECONOMIC IMPACT OF SYSTEMATIC MALNUTRITION RISK SCREENING: A COMPARISON OF COSTS BETWEEN OMITTING AND PERFORMING SCREENING

Linked sessions

Media Presentation

Calculation methods used in the study

PD453

ECONOMIC IMPACT OF SYSTEMATIC MALNUTRITION RISK SCREENING: A COMPARISON OF COSTS BETWEEN OMITTING AND PERFORMING SCREENING

U. Siljamäki-Ojansuu1,*, S. Alanne2

1Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, 2The Wellbeing Services County of South Ostrobothnia, Seinäjoki, Finland

 

Rationale: The study compared the economic impact of systematic malnutrition risk screening versus no screening, focusing on nutritional care costs and hospital stays.

Methods: A decision-analytic method compared systematic screening versus no screening over a four-day hospital stay. Upon admission, 50% of patients were assumed to be not at risk, 30% at risk, and 20% malnourished. Without screening, 50% remain identified as no-risk, but personnel only detect the most clearly malnourished patients (15%) through visual observation. Consequently, 35%—consisting of at-risk and undetected malnourished patients—remain unidentified. Care for at-risk patients included a daily oral nutritional supplement (ONS) and protein-energy rich diet. Malnourished patients received two daily ONS, protein-energy rich diet, and dietician counseling. Analysis used Finnish avarage earnings for nursing and dietetic, with a hospital day estimated at €1,000.

Results: Additional nutritional care costs for 100 patients over four days were €5,030 with screening and €2,550 without screening. While malnutrition extends hospital stays to 3–7 days, our calculation attributes the remaining 3 days of prolonged hospitalization to malnutrition. At €1,000 per bed day, the prolonged hospital stay of just one malnourished patient (€3,000) exceeds total screening costs for 100 patients.

Conclusion: Systematic screening is a highly cost-effective intervention. Although screening increased direct nutritional costs by ~€2,480 per 100 patients, these costs were minimal compared with the economic burden of untreated malnutrition. Since the prolonged stay of a single patient is more expensive than screening 100 patients, systematic screening is both clinically and economically vital.

Disclosure of Interest: None declared