M Planas1. 1. Intensive Care Unit, Hospital General Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A multicenter survey to study the use of nutritional support in patients admitted to the ICU in Spain. DESIGN: The survey was announced during the annual Spanish Society of Intensive Care Medicine and Coronary Units (SEMIUC) congress meeting. SETTING: Questionnaires designed to determine current clinical practice concerning artificial nutrition were sent to the 27 ICU who accepted to participate. PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS: In each center the 235-question form was filled out individually for each patient admitted to the ICU during the month of March, 1992. INTERVENTIONS: To validate the study a preliminary pilot surveys were conducted to ensure that there was a correct interpretation of the questions. The replies were entered into a database for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1261 patients were studied; 33.9% received artificial nutrition (AN). The administration of AN was significantly higher in the medical group (44%), than in the surgical (37%) and the trauma group (19%). AN was significantly lower in patients admitted to private clinic than public institutions (26.7% versus 34.7%). Among the patients who received AN, enteral nutrition (EN) was administered to 59.7% of the patients, total parenteral nutrition (TPN) to 38.5%, and peripheral parenteral nutrition (PPN) to 18.2%. Medical patients received significantly more EN than surgical and trauma patients. Surgical patients received more PN than medical and trauma groups. CONCLUSIONS: Nutritional support is a common practice in the treatment of ICU patients in our country. All information concerning its use is necessary to optimize it.
OBJECTIVE: A multicenter survey to study the use of nutritional support in patients admitted to the ICU in Spain. DESIGN: The survey was announced during the annual Spanish Society of Intensive Care Medicine and Coronary Units (SEMIUC) congress meeting. SETTING: Questionnaires designed to determine current clinical practice concerning artificial nutrition were sent to the 27 ICU who accepted to participate. PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS: In each center the 235-question form was filled out individually for each patient admitted to the ICU during the month of March, 1992. INTERVENTIONS: To validate the study a preliminary pilot surveys were conducted to ensure that there was a correct interpretation of the questions. The replies were entered into a database for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1261 patients were studied; 33.9% received artificial nutrition (AN). The administration of AN was significantly higher in the medical group (44%), than in the surgical (37%) and the trauma group (19%). AN was significantly lower in patients admitted to private clinic than public institutions (26.7% versus 34.7%). Among the patients who received AN, enteral nutrition (EN) was administered to 59.7% of the patients, total parenteral nutrition (TPN) to 38.5%, and peripheral parenteral nutrition (PPN) to 18.2%. Medical patients received significantly more EN than surgical and traumapatients. Surgical patients received more PN than medical and trauma groups. CONCLUSIONS: Nutritional support is a common practice in the treatment of ICU patients in our country. All information concerning its use is necessary to optimize it.