Effectiveness and cost savings of employing speech therapists in a home artificial nutrition unit.
Alice Di Battista, Ylenia Di Giancaterino, Lucia Di Palma and 4 others
PMID 40909465WHAT IT FOUND
In 149 patients in a home artificial nutrition service, the unit recorded annual savings of €30,278.67 after personalized prescriptions from a speech therapist.
The study had no control group.
Key findings
01All 149 patients assessed by a speech therapist in the home artificial nutrition unit during 2023 were included, with no exclusion criteria.
02Before speech therapist assessment, prescriptions were standardized at four jars of thickeners per month and six water gels daily; personalized prescribing was recorded as an annual saving of €30,278.67.
03The authors state that, because there was no control group, the observed cost reduction cannot be exclusively attributed to speech therapist intervention.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was descriptive and had no control group, so the cost saving cannot be separated from other changes in the service or prescribing environment. It included 149 patients from one home artificial nutrition unit, and the authors say a larger sample would be needed for wider generalizability. The cost analysis compared a usual standardized prescription with personalized prescriptions after speech therapist assessment, not a controlled comparison. The reported outcomes were cost savings and assessment requests, not swallowing improvement, hospitalization, aspiration pneumonia, or quality of life. Potential differences in local prescribing patterns, product availability, and clinical practices across local health units were not adjusted for, because detailed public cost data were unavailable.
Declared interests
The authors declare that no financial support was received for the research or publication of the article.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the €30,278.67 saving as proof that employing a speech therapist caused the cost reduction. The study had no control group, and the authors state the reduction cannot be exclusively attributed to speech therapist intervention.