English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Underfeeding in critical illness is common and associated with poor outcomes. According to large prospective hospital studies, volume-based feeding (VBF) safely and effectively improves energy and protein delivery to critically ill patients compared to traditional rate-based feeding (RBF) and might improve patient outcomes. A before-and-after study was designed to evaluate the safety, efficacy and clinical outcomes associated with VBF compared to RBF in a single intensive care unit (ICU).    Methods  The sample included consecutively admitted critically ill adults, mechanically ventilated for at least 72 h and fed enterally for a minimum of 48 h. The first cohort ( n  = 46) was fed using RBF, the second ( n  = 46) using VBF, and observed for 7 days, or until extubation or death. Statistical comparison of percentage feed volume, energy and protein delivered, plus indices of feed intolerance, were the primary outcomes of interest. Secondary observations included ventilation period, mortality, and length of ICU stay (LOICUS).    Results  Groups were comparable in baseline clinical and demographic characteristics and nutrition practices. Volume delivered to the VBF group increased significantly by 11.2% ( p  ≤ 0.001), energy by 13.4% ( p  ≤ 0.001) and protein by 8.4% ( p  = 0.02), compared to the RBF group. In the VBF group, patients meeting > 90% of energy requirements increased significantly from 47.8 to 84.8% ( p  ≤ 0.001); those meeting > 90% of protein requirements changed from 56.5 to 73.9% ( p  = 0.134).  VBF did not increase symptoms of feed intolerance. Adjusted binomial logistic regression found each additional 1% of prescribed feed delivered decreased the odds of vomiting by 0.942 (5.8%), 95% CI [0.900–0.985],  p  = 0.010.  No differences in mortality or LOICUS were identified. Kaplan-Meier found a significantly increased extubation rate in patients receiving > 90% of protein requirements compared to those meeting < 80%, ( p  = 0.006). Adjusted Cox regression found the daily probability of being extubated tripled in patients receiving > 90% of their protein needs compared to the group receiving < 80%, hazard ratio 3.473,  p  = 0.021, 95% CI [1.205–10.014].    Conclusion  VBF safely and effectively increased the delivery of energy and protein to critically ill patients. Increased protein delivery may improve extubation rate which has positive patient-centred and financial implications, warranting larger confirmatory trials. This investigation adds weight to the ICU literature supporting VBF, and the growing evidence which advocates for enhanced protein delivery to improve patient outcomes.    Electronic supplementary material  The online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-019-2388-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

critical care

Safety and efficacy of volume-based feeding in critically ill, mechanically ventilated adults using the ‘Protein &amp; Energy Requirements Fed for Every Critically ill patient every Time’ (PERFECT) protocol: a before-and-after study