Journal of Renal Nutrition
Volume 19, Issue 2 , Pages 183-188, March 2009

Do Hemodialysis Patients Prefer Renal-Specific or Standard Oral Nutritional Supplements?

  • Rosalind F. Williams, BSc (Hons)

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress reprint requests to Rosalind F. Williams, BSc (Hons), Dietetics Department, Platt Rehab 2, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9WL, United Kingdom.
  • ,
  • Angela M. Summers, BSc (Hons), PhD

Dietetics Department, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, England, United Kingdom

Objective

We investigated whether hemodialysis (HD) patients prefer standard or renal-specific oral nutritional supplements (ONS).

Design

Standard ONS Fortisip (Nutricia Clinical Care, Wiltshire, Trowbridge, UK) and renal ONS Renilon (Nutricia Clinical Care) and Nepro (Abbott Laboratories, Ltd., Maidenhead, Berkshire, UK) were compared using single-blind taste tests and face-to-face, interviewer-administered questionnaires.

Setting

This study took place in our HD unit in September 2007.

Patients

There were 40 patients, including 24 males, 14 smokers, and 26 Caucasians, aged <30 years (n = 6), 31 to 50 years (n = 13), 51 to 70 years (n = 12), and >70 years (n = 9).

Intervention

Patients ranked ONS taste on a Likert scale (1 to 5), and compared flavor options, phosphate-binder requirements, and fluid contribution.

Main Outcome Measure

Which factors influenced a patient's choice of ONS?

Results

Gender, smoking status, ethnicity, and age influenced patients’ choices. The taste of Fortisip and Nepro was liked by 58% (n = 23), versus 28% liking Renilon (n = 11). Renilon was disliked by 35% (n = 14), Nepro was disliked by 30% (n = 12), and Fortisip was disliked by 25% (n = 10). The favorite taste was Fortisip, in 52% (n = 21). However, 21% (n = 4) who preferred the taste of renal ONS would not choose them long-term because of their limited flavor ranges. The lack of phosphate binders with Renilon was a deciding factor in 27% (n = 19/33). The low fluid contribution of renal ONS influenced the choice of 43% (n = 12/28). All factors considered, standard ONS remained most popular for patients aged >70 years. However, in all other subgroups, and particularly males and non-Caucasians, renal ONS became more popular. Many patients (23%; n = 9) would sacrifice taste for the benefits of renal ONS.

Conclusions

Renal ONS are more popular in HD patients because of their low fluid contribution and phosphate-binder requirements, which can influence preference over taste. Patients need information to make informed choices.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 30.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1051-2276(08)00468-8

doi:10.1053/j.jrn.2008.11.011

Journal of Renal Nutrition
Volume 19, Issue 2 , Pages 183-188, March 2009