Mounting Clarity on Enteral Feeding in Critically Ill Patients.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Morrissette KM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7124725 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:To identify risk factors for enteral feeding intolerance screening in critically ill patients, thereby, provide some reference for healthcare staff to assess the risk of feeding intolerance, and lay the foundation for future scale development. Methods: This study used a mixed methodology, including a literature review, semi-structured interviews, the Delphi technique, and the analytic hierarchy process. We used the literature review and semi-structured interviews (n=22) to draft a preliminarily item pool for feeding intolerance, Delphi technique (n=30) to screen and determine the items, and the analytic hierarchy process to calculate the weight of each item. The study was conducted between June 2014 and September 2015 in Daping Hospital, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China. Results. Twenty-three risk factors were selected for the scale, including 5 dimensions. We assigned a weight to each item according to their impact on the feeding intolerance, with a higher score indicating a greater impact. The weight of each dimension was decreasing as follows: patient conditions, weight score equals 42; general conditions, weight score equals 23; gastrointestinal functions, weight score equals 15; biochemical indexes, weight score equals 14; and treatment measures, weight score equals 6. Conclusion. Developed list of risk factors based on literature review, survey among health care professionals and expert consensus should provide a basis for future studies assessing the risk of feeding intolerance in critically ill patients.
| S-EPMC5556298 | biostudies-other
Project description:One nutritional challenge in critically ill patients is enteral feeding intolerance (EFI), but current prokinetic agents have uncertain efficacy and safety profiles. We conducted a longitudinal, single-center, retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of domperidone administered via the feeding tube versus intravenous (IV) metoclopramide among adult patients with EFI. The primary outcome was feeding success, defined as the proportion of patients with average percentage of daily protein prescription >80% of the target dose. The secondary outcomes were safety endpoints. Among 28,814 intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, 552 patients with EFI were included, 38 receiving IV metoclopramide and 514 receiving tube feeding domperidone. The proportion of feeding success in patients receiving tube feeding domperidone and IV metoclopramide was 42.02% and 21.05%, respectively. After 1:2 matching (IV metoclopramide to tube feeding domperidone), the proportion of feeding success was 40.79% in patients receiving tube feeding domperidone. Basically, after matching, there were no differences in any safety endpoints (mortality and length of stay during ICU and hospitalization, organ-support-treatment free days) or adverse events (recurrence of EFI, electrolyte disturbance, abdominal and other symptoms) between the two groups (p > 0.05). A logistic regression analysis in the matched cohort indicated that domperidone administered via the feeding tube was independently associated with feeding success. We found that tube feeding domperidone was efficient in increasing enteral nutrition delivery performance among critically ill adult patients with EFI.
| S-EPMC8466316 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimTo assess the feasibility, tolerance and effectiveness of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the prone position for severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS).MethodsProspective observational study conducted in a multidisciplinary critical care unit of a tertiary care hospital from January 2013 until July 2015. All patients with ARDS who received invasive mechanical ventilation in prone position during the study period were included. Patients' demographics, severity of illness (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) score), baseline markers of nutritional status (subjective global assessment (SGA) and body mass index), details of nutrition delivery during prone and supine hours and outcomes (Length of stay and discharge status) were recorded.ResultsFifty-one patients met inclusion criteria out of whom four patients were excluded from analysis since they did not receive any enteral nutrition due to severe hemodynamic instability. The mean age of patients was 46.4 ± 12.9 years, with male:female ratio of 7:3. On admission, SGA revealed moderate malnutrition in 51% of patients and the mean APACHE II score was 26.8 ± 9.2. The average duration of prone ventilation per patient was 60.2 ± 30.7 h. All patients received continuous nasogastric/orogastric feeds. The mean calories (kcal/kg/day) and protein (g/kg/day) prescribed in the supine position were 24.5 ± 3.8 and 1.1 ± 0.2 while the mean calories and protein prescribed in prone position were 23.5 ± 3.6 and 1.1 ± 0.2, respectively. Percentage of prescribed calories received by patients in supine position was similar to that in prone position (83.2% vs. 79.6%; P = 0.12). Patients received a higher percentage of prescribed protein in supine compared to prone position (80.8% vs. 75%, P = 0.02). The proportion of patients who received at least 75% of the caloric and protein goals was 37 (78.7%) and 37 (78.7%) in supine and 32 (68.1%) and 21 (44.6%) in prone position.ConclusionIn critically ill patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the prone position, enteral nutrition with nasogastric/orogastric feeding is feasible and well tolerated. Nutritional delivery of calories and proteins in prone position is comparable to that in supine position.
| S-EPMC7890761 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectiveEnteral nutrition (EN) feeding protocol was proposed to have positive impact on critically ill patients. However, current studies showed conflicting results. The present study aimed to investigate whether enteral feeding protocol was able to improve clinical outcomes in critically ill patients.MethodsA before (stage 1) and after (stage 2) interventional study was performed in 10 tertiary care hospitals. All patients expected to stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) for over three days were potentially eligible. Clinical outcomes such as 28-day mortality, ICU length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation (MV), and nosocomial infection were compared between the two stages.Main resultsA total of 410 patients were enrolled during the study period, including 236 in stage 1 and 174 in stage 2. EN feeding protocol was able to increase the proportion of EN in day 2 (41.8±22.3 vs. 50.0±28.3%; p = 0.006) and day 6 (70.3±25.2 vs. 77.6±25.8%; p = 0.006). EN percentages tended to be higher in stage 1 than that in stage 2 on other days, but statistical significance was not reached. There was no difference in 28-day mortality between stage 1 and 2 (0.14 vs. 0.14; p = 0.984). Implementation of EN feeding protocol marginally reduced ICU length of stay (19.44±18.48 vs. 16.29±16.19 days; p = 0.077). There was no difference in the duration of MV between stage a and stage 2 (14.24±14.49 vs. 14.51±17.55 days; p = 0.877).ConclusionsThe study found that the EN feeding protocol was able to increase the proportion of EN feeding, but failed to reduce 28-day mortality, incidence of nosocomial infection or duration of MV.
| S-EPMC5542540 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Abdominal X-rays, the diagnostic method for enteral feeding tube (EFT) positioning, are a source of irradiation for the patients and carry a potential risk of adverse effects. Data related to ultrasound (US)-guided EFT placement are scarce. We evaluated 41 patients with 41 EFT insertions with guidewire in place that was maintained until US examination. US detected 38 patients with proper positioning and 3 with inadequate positioning, with a sensitivity of 97% (95% CI 84.9-99.8%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI 19.7-100%). The assessment of EFT position through abdominal US is practical and safe, associated with satisfactory diagnostic accuracy.
| S-EPMC5563025 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundEnteral nutrition is currently the route of choice for feeding critically ill patients with a functioning gut but delivery is commonly associated with disruptions. Common reasons for interruptions to enteral nutrition are fasting for diagnostic procedures, surgery and airway management. These interruptions result in significant calorie deficits that are associated with increased complications. We aimed to describe the specific interruptions in our patient group and the impact they have on nutrition delivery before and after implementation of a fasting guideline.MethodsA service improvement project was undertaken over two different time points, 1 year apart, to evaluate the effectiveness of a fasting guideline in a general/trauma ICU in a London teaching hospital.ResultsThere were 62 interruptions to enteral nutrition delivery with the first data collection and 64 in the second. Prolonged fasting before and after surgery and airway procedures were initially identified as the two most important causes of delays. Implementation of the fasting guideline resulted in statistical and clinical improvements in reducing fasting for airways procedures. The calorie deficit also statistically and clinically decreased as a result of the guideline.ConclusionsWe conclude that the introduction of a simple guideline stipulating reduced fasting times before ICU procedures can result in less time lost in feed interruptions and improved enteral nutrition delivery.
| S-EPMC5606376 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo provide evidence-based guidelines for early enteral nutrition (EEN) during critical illness.MethodsWe aimed to compare EEN vs. early parenteral nutrition (PN) and vs. delayed EN. We defined "early" EN as EN started within 48 h independent of type or amount. We listed, a priori, conditions in which EN is often delayed, and performed systematic reviews in 24 such subtopics. If sufficient evidence was available, we performed meta-analyses; if not, we qualitatively summarized the evidence and based our recommendations on expert opinion. We used the GRADE approach for guideline development. The final recommendations were compiled via Delphi rounds.ResultsWe formulated 17 recommendations favouring initiation of EEN and seven recommendations favouring delaying EN. We performed five meta-analyses: in unselected critically ill patients, and specifically in traumatic brain injury, severe acute pancreatitis, gastrointestinal (GI) surgery and abdominal trauma. EEN reduced infectious complications in unselected critically ill patients, in patients with severe acute pancreatitis, and after GI surgery. We did not detect any evidence of superiority for early PN or delayed EN over EEN. All recommendations are weak because of the low quality of evidence, with several based only on expert opinion.ConclusionsWe suggest using EEN in the majority of critically ill under certain precautions. In the absence of evidence, we suggest delaying EN in critically ill patients with uncontrolled shock, uncontrolled hypoxaemia and acidosis, uncontrolled upper GI bleeding, gastric aspirate >500 ml/6 h, bowel ischaemia, bowel obstruction, abdominal compartment syndrome, and high-output fistula without distal feeding access.
| S-EPMC5323492 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Nutritional support is an essential part of the management of critically ill patients. However, optimal caloric intake has not been systematically evaluated. We aim to compare two strategies of enteral feeding: permissive underfeeding versus target feeding. METHOD/DESIGN: This is an international multi-center randomized controlled trial in critically ill medical- surgical adult patients. Using a centralized allocation, 862 patients will be randomized to permissive underfeeding or target feeding. Patients in the permissive group receive 50% (acceptable range is 40% to 60%) of the calculated caloric requirement, while those in the targeted group receive 100% (acceptable range 70% to 100%) of the calculated caloric requirement. The primary outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes include ICU and hospital mortality, 28-day, and 180-day mortality as well as health care-associated infections, organ failure, and length of stay in the ICU and hospital. The trial has 80% power to detect an 8% absolute reduction in 90-day mortality assuming a baseline risk of death of 25% at an alpha level of 0.05. DISCUSSION: Patient recruitment started in November 2009 and is currently active in five centers. The Data Monitoring Committee advised continuation of the trial after the first interim analysis. The study is expected to finish by November 2013. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN68144998.
| S-EPMC3517534 | biostudies-other
Project description:Glutamine supplementation in specific groups of critically ill patients results in favourable clinical outcome. Enhancement of citrulline and arginine synthesis by glutamine could serve as a potential mechanism. However, while receiving optimal enteral nutrition, uptake and enteral metabolism of glutamine in critically ill patients remain unknown. Therefore we investigated the effect of a therapeutically relevant dose of L-glutamine on synthesis of L-citrulline and subsequent L-arginine in this group. Ten versus ten critically ill patients receiving full enteral nutrition, or isocaloric isonitrogenous enteral nutrition including 0.5?g/kg L-alanyl-L-glutamine, were studied using stable isotopes. A cross-over design using intravenous and enteral tracers enabled splanchnic extraction (SE) calculations. Endogenous rate of appearance and SE of glutamine citrulline and arginine was not different (SE controls versus alanyl-glutamine: glutamine 48 and 48%, citrulline 33 versus 45%, and arginine 45 versus 42%). Turnover from glutamine to citrulline and arginine was not higher in glutamine-administered patients. In critically ill nonseptic patients receiving adequate nutrition and a relevant dose of glutamine there was no extra citrulline or arginine synthesis and glutamine SE was not increased. This suggests that for arginine synthesis enhancement there is no need for an additional dose of glutamine when this population is adequately fed. This trial is registered with NTR2285.
| S-EPMC4855021 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionGlutamine (GLN) has been suggested to have a beneficial influence on outcomes of critically ill patients. However, recent large-scale trials have suggested harm associated with GLN supplementation. Recently, systematic reviews on the use of parenteral GLN have been published; however, less information is available on the role of enteral GLN. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to study the effects of enteral GLN supplementation in patients with critical illness.MethodsWe identified randomized controlled trials conducted from 1980 to 2014 with enterally administered GLN in adult critically ill patients. Studies of parenteral GLN only or combined enteral-parenteral GLN were excluded. The methodological quality of studies was scored, and trial data were statistically combined. We examined a priori the treatment effects in subgroups of trials of burn and trauma patients.ResultsA total of 11 studies involving 1079 adult critically ill patients and enteral GLN supplementation were identified. Enteral GLN supplementation was not associated with a reduction of hospital mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-1.36; p = 0.74), infectious complications (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.79-1.10; p = 0.39) or stay in the intensive care unit (weighted mean difference [WMD] -1.36 days, 95% CI -5.51 to 2.78; p = 0.52). However, there was a significant reduction in hospital stay (WMD 4.73 days, 95% CI -8.53 to -0.90; p = 0.02). In the subset of studies of patients with burns, enteral GLN supplementation was associated with significant reductions in hospital mortality (RR 0.19, 95% 0.06-0.67; p = 0.010) and hospital stay (WMD -9.16, 95% CI -15.06 to -3.26; p = 0.002). There was no effect in trauma patients.ConclusionsEnteral GLN supplementation does not confer significant clinical benefit in critically ill patients, with the exception of reduced hospital stay. There may be a significant benefit in patients with burns, but data are sparse and larger randomized trials are warranted to confirm this effect.
| S-EPMC4539709 | biostudies-literature