Abstract
It is often assumed that polymeric formula is more palatable than elemental formula however there is limited research to support this assumption. This study aimed firstly to compare the palatability of polymeric and elemental nutrition formulae and secondly to gauge the acceptability of these formulae as a treatment option for active Crohn's disease.
patients with Crohn's disease attending adult gastroenterology outpatient appointments were approached to complete an oral taste test of two nutrition formulae. Patients were asked to taste 10 ml of elemental and 10 ml of polymeric formula and rate each for drinkability, flavour, mouth feel, aftertaste, acridity and overall preference. Patients were also asked if they would consider using exclusive enteral nutrition for eight weeks if they had severe, moderate or mild Crohn's disease symptoms.
35 patients participated, median age was 39 years old (range 19-77 years) and 63% were males. Polymeric formula was preferred by 91% of patients and rated favourably compared with elemental formula for drinkability, flavour, mouth feel and acridity (p<0.001) but not aftertaste (p=0.09). Exclusive enteral nutrition for eight weeks was considered as a treatment option for severe symptoms by 97% of patients, for moderate symptoms by 80% of patients and for mild symptoms by 43% of patients.
adults with Crohn's disease prefer a polymeric over elemental nutrition formula. If exclusive enteral nutrition could put their disease into remission most patients would consider using it for 8 weeks if they had severe or moderate symptoms.