Should handgrip strength be considered when choosing the administration mode of oral nutritional supplements in geriatric patients? A secondary analysis of the MEDPass Trial

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
Katja Uhlmann M.Sc. , Emilie Reber Ph.D. , Katja A. Schonenberger Ph.D. , Zeno Stanga , Silvia Kurmann M.Sc.
{"title":"Should handgrip strength be considered when choosing the administration mode of oral nutritional supplements in geriatric patients? A secondary analysis of the MEDPass Trial","authors":"Katja Uhlmann M.Sc. ,&nbsp;Emilie Reber Ph.D. ,&nbsp;Katja A. Schonenberger Ph.D. ,&nbsp;Zeno Stanga ,&nbsp;Silvia Kurmann M.Sc.","doi":"10.1016/j.nut.2024.112429","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>It is important to individualize nutrition therapy and to identify whether certain patient groups benefit from a specific intervention such as oral nutritional supplements (ONS). This study investigated whether patients with weak handgrip strength (HGS) benefit better from ONS administration in the Medication Pass Nutritional Supplement Program (MEDPass) mode regarding the individual coverage of energy and protein requirements throughout their hospitalization.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A secondary analysis of the intention-to-treat data set of the randomized controlled MEDPass trial was conducted. Weak HGS was defined as &lt;27 kg for men and &lt;16 kg for women. Linear mixed-effect models adjusted for the stratification factors energy density of ONS and nutritional risk screening 2002 score were used to address the aim of the study.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We included 188 participants. Energy and protein coverage did not differ between the patients with weak or normal HGS depending on ONS administration mode (<em>P</em> = 0.084, <em>P</em> = 0.108). Patients with weak HGS and MEDPass administration mode tended to have the lowest energy and protein coverage (estimated mean, 77.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 69.3%–85% and estimated mean, 95.1%; 95% CI, 85.3%–105%, respectively). Patients with weak HGS and conventional ONS administration had the highest energy and protein coverage (estimated mean, 90%; 95% CI, 82.8%–97.2% and estimated mean, 110.2%; 95% CI, 101.3%–119%, respectively).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>No clear recommendations regarding the mode of ONS administration depending on HGS can be made. In clinical practice, appetite and satiety in patients with weak HGS should be monitored, and the ONS administration mode should be adjusted accordingly.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899900724000790/pdfft?md5=a9ad228390ce63a88c695bf3bcdca150&pid=1-s2.0-S0899900724000790-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899900724000790","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

It is important to individualize nutrition therapy and to identify whether certain patient groups benefit from a specific intervention such as oral nutritional supplements (ONS). This study investigated whether patients with weak handgrip strength (HGS) benefit better from ONS administration in the Medication Pass Nutritional Supplement Program (MEDPass) mode regarding the individual coverage of energy and protein requirements throughout their hospitalization.

Methods

A secondary analysis of the intention-to-treat data set of the randomized controlled MEDPass trial was conducted. Weak HGS was defined as <27 kg for men and <16 kg for women. Linear mixed-effect models adjusted for the stratification factors energy density of ONS and nutritional risk screening 2002 score were used to address the aim of the study.

Results

We included 188 participants. Energy and protein coverage did not differ between the patients with weak or normal HGS depending on ONS administration mode (P = 0.084, P = 0.108). Patients with weak HGS and MEDPass administration mode tended to have the lowest energy and protein coverage (estimated mean, 77.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 69.3%–85% and estimated mean, 95.1%; 95% CI, 85.3%–105%, respectively). Patients with weak HGS and conventional ONS administration had the highest energy and protein coverage (estimated mean, 90%; 95% CI, 82.8%–97.2% and estimated mean, 110.2%; 95% CI, 101.3%–119%, respectively).

Conclusion

No clear recommendations regarding the mode of ONS administration depending on HGS can be made. In clinical practice, appetite and satiety in patients with weak HGS should be monitored, and the ONS administration mode should be adjusted accordingly.

在选择老年患者口服营养补充剂的给药方式时,是否应考虑手握强度?- 对 MEDPass 试验的二次分析
目标个性化营养治疗以及确定某些患者群体是否能从口服营养补充剂(ONS)等特定干预措施中获益非常重要。本研究调查了手握力量(HGS)较弱的患者在住院期间是否能更好地从 "药物通营养补充计划"(MEDPass)模式下的口服营养补充剂中获得个人所需的能量和蛋白质。弱 HGS 的定义为男性 27 千克,女性 16 千克。为达到研究目的,我们使用了线性混合效应模型,并对ONS能量密度和2002年营养风险筛查评分等分层因素进行了调整。根据 ONS 给药方式的不同,HGS 弱或正常患者的能量和蛋白质覆盖率没有差异(P = 0.084,P = 0.108)。HGS较弱的患者采用 MEDPass 给药模式时,能量和蛋白质覆盖率往往最低(估计平均值分别为 77.2%;95% 置信区间 [CI],69.3%-85% 和估计平均值分别为 95.1%;95% 置信区间 [CI],85.3%-105%)。结论 目前还没有针对 HGS 的 ONS 施用模式提出明确建议。在临床实践中,应监测弱 HGS 患者的食欲和饱腹感,并相应调整 ONS 给药模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信