Energy and protein nutrition adequacy in general wards among intensive care unit survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Zenzi Rosseel, Pieter-Jan Cortoos, Lynn Leemans, Arthur R H van Zanten, Claudine Ligneel, Elisabeth De Waele
{"title":"Energy and protein nutrition adequacy in general wards among intensive care unit survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Zenzi Rosseel, Pieter-Jan Cortoos, Lynn Leemans, Arthur R H van Zanten, Claudine Ligneel, Elisabeth De Waele","doi":"10.1002/jpen.2699","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Adequate energy and protein provision is mandatory to optimize survival chances in critical illness, prevent loss of muscle mass, and reduce length of stay. Data are available concerning feeding adequacy in intensive care unit (ICU) participants, but little is known about the adequacy in post-ICU participants. This systematic review aimed to evaluate feeding adequacy in post-ICU participants and addressed causes of feeding interruption leading to suboptimal adequacy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For this systematic review, a bibliographic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Randomized controlled studies, non-randomized controlled studies, and observational studies conducted between January 1990 and November 2023 fulfilling the inclusion criteria were withheld.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight studies were included. Outcomes reported were energy and protein adequacy, barriers, and feeding routes. Energy and protein requirements were determined in various ways, including indirect calorimetry and standardized and weight-based formulas. Energy adequacy ranged from 52% to 102% and protein adequacy between 63% and 86%. Participants were mainly fed with enteral nutrition (EN) or a combination of oral nutrition and EN. The main barrier reported for inadequate nutrition intake was feeding tube removal.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Next to different ways in calculating targets and reporting results, a wide range in energy and protein adequacy was observed, but with constant protein underfeeding. Participants fed with EN or a combination of EN and oral nutrition had the best adequacy; inappropriate tube removal is a common barrier leading to inadequate therapy. Standardized reporting and larger studies are needed to guide nutrition care for post-ICU participants.</p>","PeriodicalId":16668,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jpen.2699","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Adequate energy and protein provision is mandatory to optimize survival chances in critical illness, prevent loss of muscle mass, and reduce length of stay. Data are available concerning feeding adequacy in intensive care unit (ICU) participants, but little is known about the adequacy in post-ICU participants. This systematic review aimed to evaluate feeding adequacy in post-ICU participants and addressed causes of feeding interruption leading to suboptimal adequacy.

Methods: For this systematic review, a bibliographic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Randomized controlled studies, non-randomized controlled studies, and observational studies conducted between January 1990 and November 2023 fulfilling the inclusion criteria were withheld.

Results: Eight studies were included. Outcomes reported were energy and protein adequacy, barriers, and feeding routes. Energy and protein requirements were determined in various ways, including indirect calorimetry and standardized and weight-based formulas. Energy adequacy ranged from 52% to 102% and protein adequacy between 63% and 86%. Participants were mainly fed with enteral nutrition (EN) or a combination of oral nutrition and EN. The main barrier reported for inadequate nutrition intake was feeding tube removal.

Conclusion: Next to different ways in calculating targets and reporting results, a wide range in energy and protein adequacy was observed, but with constant protein underfeeding. Participants fed with EN or a combination of EN and oral nutrition had the best adequacy; inappropriate tube removal is a common barrier leading to inadequate therapy. Standardized reporting and larger studies are needed to guide nutrition care for post-ICU participants.

重症监护室幸存者在普通病房的能量和蛋白质营养充足性:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:为了优化危重病人的存活机会、防止肌肉量减少并缩短住院时间,必须提供充足的能量和蛋白质。目前已有重症监护室(ICU)患者进食充足性的相关数据,但对重症监护室术后患者的进食充足性却知之甚少。本系统性综述旨在评估重症监护室术后患者的进食充足性,并探讨导致进食不足的原因:本系统综述在 PubMed、Scopus 和 Web of Science 中进行了文献检索。符合纳入标准的随机对照研究、非随机对照研究以及在 1990 年 1 月至 2023 年 11 月期间进行的观察性研究均未被纳入:结果:共纳入八项研究。报告的结果包括能量和蛋白质的充足性、障碍和喂养途径。确定能量和蛋白质需求量的方法多种多样,包括间接热量测定法、标准化配方和基于体重的配方。能量充足率在 52% 到 102% 之间,蛋白质充足率在 63% 到 86% 之间。参与者主要通过肠内营养(EN)或口服营养与肠内营养相结合的方式进食。据报告,营养摄入不足的主要障碍是拔除喂食管:除了计算目标和报告结果的方法不同外,还观察到能量和蛋白质的充足性存在很大差异,但蛋白质摄入量一直不足。使用营养EN或营养EN与口服营养相结合喂养的参与者的充足性最好;不适当地拔除喂食管是导致治疗不足的常见障碍。需要标准化的报告和更大规模的研究来指导重症监护室术后参与者的营养护理。
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
7.80
自引率
8.80%
发文量
161
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (JPEN) is the premier scientific journal of nutrition and metabolic support. It publishes original peer-reviewed studies that define the cutting edge of basic and clinical research in the field. It explores the science of optimizing the care of patients receiving enteral or IV therapies. Also included: reviews, techniques, brief reports, case reports, and abstracts.
×
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