Do hemodialysis patients prefer renal-specific or standard oral nutritional supplements?

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

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.

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

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).

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

Which factors influenced a patient's choice of ONS?

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.

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.