Anxiety, Depression and Quality of Life Improve After One Month and Three Months of Home Parenteral Nutrition: A Pilot Study in a Canadian Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Patients receiving home parenteral nutrition (HPN) have a reduced quality of life (QoL), but it is unknown if this is associated with psychiatric comorbidities such as anxiety or depression. Aim The aim of this study was to assess anxiety, depression and QoL in patients transitioning from hospital to HPN. Methods We conducted a prospective study in adult patients receiving parenteral nutrition (PN) during transition from hospital to home. We assessed anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; HADS), health-related quality of life (HRQoL; SF-36) and health status (EQ-5D) before discharge and again later at one and three months after HPN was started. Results Of the 29 patients, 15 had an underlying malignancy. At baseline, 93% of patients with malignancy had anxiety or depression (HADS A and/or HADS D >7) or both, while of the patients without malignancy, 60% had anxiety, and 40% had depression. Questionnaires were completed by 21 patients at one month and by 15 at three months. Anxiety and depression scores decreased significantly after one month of HPN (mean difference [MD] anxiety: 4.3; 95% CI, 1.2–7.5, P = 0.004; MD depression: 4.0; 95% CI, 1.5–6.5, P = 0.001), and the decrease persisted at three months (MD anxiety: 35; 95% CI, 0.35–6.6, P = 0.02; MD depression: 2.5; 95% CI, 0.06–5.0, P = 0.04). Overall, patients reported an improvement in HRQoL (SF-36) after one month of HPN, and this improvement was maintained at three months in those patients who survived. Conclusion Home parenteral nutrition is associated with improvements in anxiety, depression and HRQoL at one month and three months after discharge from hospital. The improvements in Qol, anxiety and depression seem greater in patients with underlying malignancy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".