MEDPass Time- & Cost Analysis

MEDPass or conventional administration?
Based on data of the pilot study, the main study is a well-powered health economic analysis of administration modes of oral nutritional supplements (ONS).

Factsheet

Schools involved School of Health Professions
Institute(s) Nutrition and Dietetics
Funding organisation Others
Duration (planned) 01.11.2025 - 31.12.2028
Head of project Silvia Kurmann
Project staff Katja Uhlmann
Prof. Dr. Katharina Blankart
Niklaus Meier
Loan Catalano
Partner Förderorganisation: Nestlé Suisse SA
Keywords Health economic analysis, MEDPass, oral nutritional supplements

Situation

According to current evidence, the administration mode of ONS does not influence health outcomes such as energy- or protein intake, body weight or hand grip strength. However, nursing staff subjectively rates the MEDPass administration as simpler and more efficient than the conventional administration. This suggests potential time and cost savings. In our pilot study, conducted over 12 days, time savings in MEDPass versus conventional administration were found. Based on this data, we evaluated in the power analysis, that 90 days of ONS administration must be evaluated to test our hypothesis. The goal of the main study is the evaluation of potential time- and cost savings in MEDPass versus conventional administration of ONS.

Course of action

The health economic analysis is conducted based on time-driven activity-based costing. Initially, processes concerning ONS administration are analyzed with the partner clinic. Based on the processes, all activities related to ONS administration will be tracked for 45 days in conventional and for 45 days in MEDPass administration. In a health economic analysis, we will examine potential cost reductions in MEDPass versus conventional ONS administration for the Swiss health care system. As processes around ONS administration are not harmonized in acute hospitals, we will calculate different real-life scenarios.