Nutrition support practices in critically ill head-injured patients: a global perspective

Background: Critical illness following head injury is associated with a hypermetabolic state but there are insufficient epidemiological data describing acute nutrition delivery to this group of patients. Furthermore, there is little information describing relationships between nutrition and clinical outcomes in this population. Methods: We undertook an analysis of observational data, collected prospectively as part of International Nutrition Surveys 2007-2013, and extracted data obtained from critically ill patients with head trauma. Our objective was to describe global nutrition support practices in the first 12 days of hospital admission after head trauma, and to explore relationships between energy and protein intake and clinical outcomes. Data are presented as mean (SD), median (IQR), or percentages. Results: Data for 1045 patients from 341 ICUs were analyzed. The age of patients was 44.5 (19.7) years, 78 % were male, and median ICU length of stay was 13.1 (IQR 7.9-21.6) days. Most patients (94 %) were enterally fed but received only 58 % of estimated energy and 53 % of estimated protein requirements. Patients from an ICU with a feeding protocol had greater energy and protein intakes (p <0.001, 0.002 respectively) and were more likely to survive (OR 0.65; 95 % CI 0.42-0.99; p = 0.043) than those without. Energy or protein intakes were not associated with mortality. However, a greater energy and protein deficit was associated with longer times until discharge alive from both ICU and hospital (all p <0.001). Conclusion: Nutritional deficits are commonplace in critically ill head-injured patients and these deficits are associated with a delay to discharge alive.Lee-anne S. Chapple, Marianne J. Chapman, Kylie Lange, Adam M. Deane and Daren K. Heylan

Enhanced protein-energy provision via the enteral route in critically ill patients (PEP uP protocol): a review of evidence

Nutrition support is an integral part of care among critically ill patients. However, critically ill patients are commonly underfed, leading to consequences such as increased length of hospital and intensive care unit stay, time on mechanical ventilation, infectious complications, and mortality. Nevertheless, the prevalence of underfeeding has not resolved since the first description of this problem more than 15 years ago. This may be due to the traditional conservative feeding approaches. A novel feeding protocol (the Enhanced Protein-Energy Provision via the Enteral Route Feeding Protocol in Critically Ill Patients [PEP uP] protocol) was proposed and proven to improve feeding adequacy significantly. However, some of the components in the protocol are controversial and subject to debate. This article is a review of the supporting evidences and some of the controversy associated with each component of the PEP uP protocol

Handover patterns: an observational study of critical care physicians

Abstract Background Handover (or 'handoff') is the exchange of information between health professionals that accompanies the transfer of patient care. This process can result in adverse events. Handover 'best practices', with emphasis on standardization, have been widely promoted. However, these recommendations are based mostly on expert opinion and research on medical trainees. By examining handover communication of experienced physicians, we aim to inform future research, education and quality improvement. Thus, our objective is to describe handover communication patterns used by attending critical care physicians in an academic centre and to compare them with currently popular, standardized schemes for handover communication. Methods Prospective, observational study using video recording in an academic intensive care unit in Ontario, Canada. Forty individual patient handovers were randomly selected out of 10 end-of-week handover sessions of attending physicians. Two coders independently reviewed handover transcripts documenting elements of three communication schemes: SBAR (Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendations); SOAP (Subjective, Objective, Assessment, Plan); and a standard medical admission note. Frequency and extent of questions asked by incoming physicians were measured as well. Analysis consisted of descriptive statistics. Results Mean (± standard deviation) duration of patient-specific handovers was 2 min 58 sec (± 57 sec). The majority of handovers' content consisted of recent and current patient status. The remainder included physicians' interpretations and advice. Questions posed by the incoming physicians accounted for 5.8% (± 3.9%) of the handovers' content. Elements of all three standardized communication schemes appeared repeatedly throughout the handover dialogs with no consistent pattern. For example, blocks of SOAP's Assessment appeared 5.2 (± 3.0) times in patient handovers; they followed Objective blocks in only 45.9% of the opportunities and preceded Plan in just 21.8%. Certain communication elements were occasionally absent. For example, SBAR's Recommendation and admission note information about the patient's Past Medical History were absent from 22 (55.0%) and 20 (50.0%), respectively, of patient handovers. Conclusions Clinical handover practice of faculty-level critical care physicians did not conform to any of the three predefined structuring schemes. Further research is needed to examine whether alternative approaches to handover communication can be identified and to identify features of high-quality handover communication.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/112680/1/12913_2011_Article_1919.pd

Comparisons between intragastric and small intestinal delivery of enteral nutrition in the critically ill: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION: The largest cohort of critically ill patients evaluating intragastric and small intestinal delivery of nutrients was recently reported. This systematic review included recent data to compare the effects of small bowel and intragastric delivery of enteral nutrients in adult critically ill patients. METHODS: This is a systematic review of all randomised controlled studies published between 1990 and March 2013 that reported the effects of the route of enteral feeding in the critically ill on clinically important outcomes. RESULTS: Data from 15 level-2 studies were included. Small bowel feeding was associated with a reduced risk of pneumonia (Relative Risk, RR, small intestinal vs. intragastric: 0.75 (95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.93); P = 0.01; I(2 )= 11%). The point estimate was similar when only studies using microbiological data were included. Duration of ventilation (weighted mean difference: -0.36 days (-2.02 to 1.30); P = 0.65; I(2 )= 42%), length of ICU stay (WMD: 0.49 days, (-1.36 to 2.33); P = 0.60; I(2 )= 81%) and mortality (RR 1.01 (0.83 to 1.24); P = 0.92; I(2 )= 0%) were unaffected by the route of feeding. While data were limited, and there was substantial statistical heterogeneity, there was significantly improved nutrient intake via the small intestinal route (% goal rate received: 11% (5 to 16%); P = 0.0004; I(2 )= 88%). CONCLUSIONS: Use of small intestinal feeding may improve nutritional intake and reduce the incidence of ICU-acquired pneumonia. In unselected critically ill patients other clinically important outcomes were unaffected by the site of the feeding tube

Reduction of nosocomial pneumonia after major burns by trace element supplementation: aggregation of two randomised trials

INTRODUCTION: Nosocomial pneumonia is a major source of morbidity and mortality after severe burns. Burned patients suffer trace element deficiencies and depressed antioxidant and immune defences. This study aimed at determining the effect of trace element supplementation on nosocomial or intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired pneumonia. METHODS: Two consecutive, randomised, double-blinded, supplementation studies including two homogeneous groups of 41 severely burned patients (20 placebo and 21 intervention) admitted to the burn centre of a university hospital were combined. Intervention consisted of intravenous trace element supplements (copper 2.5 to 3.1 mg/day, selenium 315 to 380 μg/day, and zinc 26.2 to 31.4 mg/day) for 8 to 21 days versus placebo. Endpoints were infections during the first 30 days (predefined criteria for pneumonia, bacteraemia, wound, urine, and other), wound healing, and length of ICU stay. Plasma and skin (study 2) concentrations of selenium and zinc were determined on days 3, 10, and 20. RESULTS: The patients, 42 ± 15 years old, were burned on 46% ± 19% of body surface: the combined characteristics of the patients did not differ between the groups. Plasma trace element concentrations and antioxidative capacity were significantly enhanced with normalisation of plasma selenium, zinc, and glutathione peroxidase concentrations in plasma and skin in the trace element-supplemented group. A significant reduction in number of infections was observed in the supplemented patients, which decreased from 3.5 ± 1.2 to 2.0 ± 1.0 episodes per patient in placebo group (p < 0.001). This was related to a reduction of nosocomial pneumonia, which occurred in 16 (80%) patients versus seven (33%) patients, respectively (p < 0.001), and of ventilator-associated pneumonia from 13 to six episodes, respectively (p = 0.023). CONCLUSION: Enhancing trace element status and antioxidant defences by selenium, zinc, and copper supplementation was associated with a decrease of nosocomial pneumonia in critically ill, severely burned patients