OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the implementation of a nutritional management protocol in the ICU leads to the increased use of enteral nutrition, earlier feeding, and improved clinical outcomes in patients. DESIGN: Prospective evaluation of critically ill patients before and after the introduction of an evidence-based guideline for providing nutritional support in the ICU. SETTING: The medical-surgical ICUs of two teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: Two hundred critically ill adult patients who remained npo > 48 h after their admission to the ICU. One hundred patients were enrolled into the preimplementation group, and 100 patients were enrolled in the postimplementation group. INTERVENTION: Implementation of an evidence-based ICU nutritional management protocol. MEASUREMENT AND RESULTS: Nutritional outcome measures included the number of patients who received enteral nutrition, the time to initiate nutritional support, and the percent caloric target administered on day 4 of nutritional support. Clinical outcomes included the duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU and in-hospital length of stay (LOS), and in-hospital mortality rates. Patients in the postimplementation group were fed more frequently via the enteral route (78% vs 68%, respectively; p = 0.08), and this difference was statistically significant after adjusting for severity of illness, baseline nutritional status, and other factors (odds ratio, 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2 to 5.0; p = 0.009). The time to feeding and the caloric intake on day 4 of nutritional support were not different between the groups. The mean (+/- SD) duration of mechanical ventilation was shorter in the postimplementation group (17.9 +/- 31.3 vs 11.2 +/- 19.5 days, respectively; p = 0.11), and this difference was statistically significant after adjusting for age, gender, severity of illness, type of admission, baseline nutritional status, and type of nutritional support (p = 0.03). There was no difference in ICU or hospital LOS between the two groups. The risk of death was 56% lower in patients who received enteral nutrition (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.80; p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: An evidence-based nutritional management protocol increased the likelihood that ICU patients would receive enteral nutrition, and shortened their duration of mechanical ventilation. Enteral nutrition was associated with a reduced risk of death in those patients studied.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the implementation of a nutritional management protocol in the ICU leads to the increased use of enteral nutrition, earlier feeding, and improved clinical outcomes in patients. DESIGN: Prospective evaluation of critically ill patients before and after the introduction of an evidence-based guideline for providing nutritional support in the ICU. SETTING: The medical-surgical ICUs of two teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: Two hundred critically ill adult patients who remained npo > 48 h after their admission to the ICU. One hundred patients were enrolled into the preimplementation group, and 100 patients were enrolled in the postimplementation group. INTERVENTION: Implementation of an evidence-based ICU nutritional management protocol. MEASUREMENT AND RESULTS: Nutritional outcome measures included the number of patients who received enteral nutrition, the time to initiate nutritional support, and the percent caloric target administered on day 4 of nutritional support. Clinical outcomes included the duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU and in-hospital length of stay (LOS), and in-hospital mortality rates. Patients in the postimplementation group were fed more frequently via the enteral route (78% vs 68%, respectively; p = 0.08), and this difference was statistically significant after adjusting for severity of illness, baseline nutritional status, and other factors (odds ratio, 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2 to 5.0; p = 0.009). The time to feeding and the caloric intake on day 4 of nutritional support were not different between the groups. The mean (+/- SD) duration of mechanical ventilation was shorter in the postimplementation group (17.9 +/- 31.3 vs 11.2 +/- 19.5 days, respectively; p = 0.11), and this difference was statistically significant after adjusting for age, gender, severity of illness, type of admission, baseline nutritional status, and type of nutritional support (p = 0.03). There was no difference in ICU or hospital LOS between the two groups. The risk of death was 56% lower in patients who received enteral nutrition (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.80; p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: An evidence-based nutritional management protocol increased the likelihood that ICU patients would receive enteral nutrition, and shortened their duration of mechanical ventilation. Enteral nutrition was associated with a reduced risk of death in those patients studied.
Authors: Todd W Rice; Arthur P Wheeler; B Taylor Thompson; Jay Steingrub; R Duncan Hite; Marc Moss; Alan Morris; Ning Dong; Peter Rock Journal: JAMA Date: 2012-02-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Julie Slicker; David A Hehir; Megan Horsley; Jessica Monczka; Kenan W Stern; Brandis Roman; Elena C Ocampo; Liz Flanagan; Erin Keenan; Linda M Lambert; Denise Davis; Marcy Lamonica; Nancy Rollison; Haleh Heydarian; Jeffrey B Anderson Journal: Congenit Heart Dis Date: 2012-08-14 Impact factor: 2.007
Authors: Brodie A Parent; Samuel P Mandell; Ronald V Maier; Joseph Minei; Jason Sperry; Ernest E Moore; Grant E O'Keefe Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 3.313
Authors: K Reinhart; F Brunkhorst; H Bone; H Gerlach; M Gründling; G Kreymann; P Kujath; G Marggraf; K Mayer; A Meier-Hellmann; C Peckelsen; C Putensen; M Quintel; M Ragaller; R Rossaint; F Stüber; N Weiler; T Welte; K Werdan Journal: Internist (Berl) Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 0.743
Authors: K Reinhart; F M Brunkhorst; H-G Bone; J Bardutzky; C-E Dempfle; H Forst; P Gastmeier; H Gerlach; M Gründling; S John; W Kern; G Kreymann; W Krüger; P Kujath; G Marggraf; J Martin; K Mayer; A Meier-Hellmann; M Oppert; C Putensen; M Quintel; M Ragaller; R Rossaint; H Seifert; C Spies; F Stüber; N Weiler; A Weimann; K Werdan; T Welte Journal: Ger Med Sci Date: 2010-06-28