Comparison of Infection Rates Among Critically Ill Patients Per Their Route of Nutrition: A Retrospective Analysis

Aim: Infection is an important problem in intensive care units (ICU) which is a complication of nutritional support. In our institution, we aimed to determine the differences in infection rates of patients who were supported with parenteral nutrition (PN) and enteral + parenteral nutrition (EN+PN) combination retrospectively. Material and Method: In this study, we enrolled 156 patients from January 1, 2011 to Agust 1, 2011. There were 88 patients in the parenteral nutrition group (Group 1) and 68 patients in the enteral+ parenteral nutrition group (Group 2). On all 156 patients, retrospective chart reviews were performed and biweekly culture results were recorded. Specifically, soft tissue infections, skin infections, catheter related blood stream infections, pneumonia and urinary tract infections were recorded. HI (hospital infection) incidences and incidence densities were also calculated in both groups. Results: There were 16 recorded infections in 16 patients among Group 1. These were 4 cases of catheter related blood stream infections, 4 cases of pneumonia, 3 cases of urinary tract infections and 5 cases of soft tissue infections. In group 2, 8 patients showed signs of infection. These were, 4 cases catheter related blood stream infections, 2 cases of soft tissue infections and 2 cases of urinary tract infections. There were no reported pneumonia cases in group 2. Discussion: According to our results, with the exception of catheter related blood stream infections, infection numbers declined within the group of combination of enteral and parenteral nutrition group than parenteral nutrition group alone, but the results were not statistically significant. The intolerance to enteral nutrition can increase the cost of stay, mainly due to increased length of stay as a result of increased infection rates. We would recommend a combination nutrition regimen in such a similar situation, in order to decrease infection rates