A prospective survey of nutritional support practices in intensive care unit patients: What is prescribed? What is delivered?
Top Cited Papers
- 1 January 2001
- journal article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Critical Care Medicine
- Vol. 29 (1) , 8-12
- https://doi.org/10.1097/00003246-200101000-00002
Abstract
To assess the amount of nutrients delivered, prescribed, and required for critically ill patients and to identify the reasons for discrepancies between prescriptions and requirements and between prescriptions and actual delivery of nutrition. Prospective cohort study. Twelve-bed medical intensive care unit in a university-affiliated general hospital. Fifty-one consecutive patients, receiving nutritional support either enterally or intravenously for > or = 2 days. We followed patients for the first 14 days of nutritional delivery. The amount of calories prescribed and the amount actually delivered were recorded daily and compared with the theoretical energy requirements. A combined regimen of enteral and parenteral nutrition was administered on 58% of the 484 nutrition days analyzed, and 63.5% of total caloric intake was delivered enterally. Seventy-eight percent of the mean caloric amount required was prescribed, and 71% was effectively delivered. The amount of calories actually delivered compared with the amount prescribed was significantly lower in enteral than in parenteral administration (86.8% vs. 112.4%, p < .001). Discrepancies between prescription and delivery of enterally administered nutrients were attributable to interruptions caused by digestive intolerance (27.7%, mean daily wasted volume 641 mL), airway management (30.8%, wasted volume 745 mL), and diagnostic procedures (26.6%, wasted volume 567 mL). Factors significantly associated with a low prescription rate of nutritional support were the administration of vasoactive drugs, central venous catheterization, and the need for extrarenal replacement. An inadequate delivery of enteral nutrition and a low rate of nutrition prescription resulted in low caloric intake in our intensive care unit patients. A large volume of enterally administered nutrients was wasted because of inadequate timing in stopping and restarting enteral feeding. The inverse correlation between the prescription rate of nutrition and the intensity of care required suggests that physicians need to pay more attention to providing appropriate nutritional support for the most severely ill patients.Keywords
This publication has 20 references indexed in Scilit:
- Total Parenteral Nutrition in the Critically Ill PatientJAMA, 1998
- Enteral nutrition in intensive care patients: a practical approachIntensive Care Medicine, 1998
- A clinician’s guide to the use of quality terminologyIntensive Care Medicine, 1998
- A 10-year survey of nutritional support in a surgical ICU: 1986–1995Nutrition, 1997
- Quality assessment of intensive care unitsCurrent Opinion in Critical Care, 1996
- A New Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) Based on a European/North American Multicenter StudyJAMA, 1993
- Does Portal Nutrition Benefit Liver Protein Synthesis?Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 1993
- Caloric requirements and supply in critically ill surgical patientsCritical Care Medicine, 1992
- The link between nutritional status and clinical outcome: can nutritional intervention modify it?The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1988
- The Harris Benedict equation reevaluated: resting energy requirements and the body cell massThe American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1984