Traditionally, Nutrition Support Teams (NST) have been employed in an advisory capacity to recommend the most beneficial type of total nutritional support. Frequently, this form of therapy is also the most economical, particularly when enteral nutrition can replace parenteral nutrition. In a retrospective study, we reviewed the files of 31 patients who had received total nutritional support and compared the nutritional therapy initiated by their attending physicians to the therapy recommended by the NST. Based on guidelines established by the NST, we evaluated patient records for appropriateness of therapy and potential monetary savings had the NST's recommendations been followed. In the majority of cases in which compliance with the NST's recommendations was not accepted, the NST had encouraged the use of enteral nutritional support rather than parenteral nutrition. In the 14 noncompliant cases (representing 280 days of nutritional support) the potential savings to these patients was estimated at $70,200 (more than $5,000 per patient).