Cargando…

Use of metabolic monitors in a multidisciplinary Intensive Care Unit: A prospective pilot study of 20 patients

INTRODUCTION: Caloric intake of critically ill patients are usually calculated using predictive equations. Recent advances in gas exchange measurements have the potential to estimate energy expenditure at the bedside and at different time periods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Energy needs of critically il...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Samra, Tanvir, Banerjee, Neerja, Gupta, Arushi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4578198/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26430340
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-5229.164804
_version_ 1782391078837551104
author Samra, Tanvir
Banerjee, Neerja
Gupta, Arushi
author_facet Samra, Tanvir
Banerjee, Neerja
Gupta, Arushi
author_sort Samra, Tanvir
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Caloric intake of critically ill patients are usually calculated using predictive equations. Recent advances in gas exchange measurements have the potential to estimate energy expenditure at the bedside and at different time periods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Energy needs of critically ill patients were estimated over a period of 3 months using simplistic formula of 25 kcal/kg/day estimated energy expenditure (EEE), Harris–Benedict equation (HBE) (Basal energy expenditure [BEE]) and M-COVX™ metabolic monitor resting energy expenditure (REE) on day 4 of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission. Calculations based on HBE were taken as standard, and percentage errors (PE) were calculated for each patient for values derived from simplistic formula and metabolic monitor. Adequacy of nutritional intake in ICU was also assessed. RESULTS: Metabolic monitor could be used in only 20/70 patients. The mean age of patients was 40 years, 65% were males, and average body mass index was 23.69 kg/m(2). Intermittent intolerance to feeds was reported in 50%. Values of REE and EEE were greater than BEE in 70% of patients. A significant difference was reported in values of PE of ≤20% and ≥30%; P = 0.0003 and 0.0001, respectively estimated using REE and EEE. CONCLUSIONS: It is not feasible to use metabolic monitors in all patients. Variability in readings is large and further studies are needed to establish the validity of its measurements. Calculations using simplistic formulas are much closer to values obtained using HBE.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4578198
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45781982015-10-01 Use of metabolic monitors in a multidisciplinary Intensive Care Unit: A prospective pilot study of 20 patients Samra, Tanvir Banerjee, Neerja Gupta, Arushi Indian J Crit Care Med Brief Communication INTRODUCTION: Caloric intake of critically ill patients are usually calculated using predictive equations. Recent advances in gas exchange measurements have the potential to estimate energy expenditure at the bedside and at different time periods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Energy needs of critically ill patients were estimated over a period of 3 months using simplistic formula of 25 kcal/kg/day estimated energy expenditure (EEE), Harris–Benedict equation (HBE) (Basal energy expenditure [BEE]) and M-COVX™ metabolic monitor resting energy expenditure (REE) on day 4 of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission. Calculations based on HBE were taken as standard, and percentage errors (PE) were calculated for each patient for values derived from simplistic formula and metabolic monitor. Adequacy of nutritional intake in ICU was also assessed. RESULTS: Metabolic monitor could be used in only 20/70 patients. The mean age of patients was 40 years, 65% were males, and average body mass index was 23.69 kg/m(2). Intermittent intolerance to feeds was reported in 50%. Values of REE and EEE were greater than BEE in 70% of patients. A significant difference was reported in values of PE of ≤20% and ≥30%; P = 0.0003 and 0.0001, respectively estimated using REE and EEE. CONCLUSIONS: It is not feasible to use metabolic monitors in all patients. Variability in readings is large and further studies are needed to establish the validity of its measurements. Calculations using simplistic formulas are much closer to values obtained using HBE. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4578198/ /pubmed/26430340 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-5229.164804 Text en Copyright: © Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms
spellingShingle Brief Communication
Samra, Tanvir
Banerjee, Neerja
Gupta, Arushi
Use of metabolic monitors in a multidisciplinary Intensive Care Unit: A prospective pilot study of 20 patients
title Use of metabolic monitors in a multidisciplinary Intensive Care Unit: A prospective pilot study of 20 patients
title_full Use of metabolic monitors in a multidisciplinary Intensive Care Unit: A prospective pilot study of 20 patients
title_fullStr Use of metabolic monitors in a multidisciplinary Intensive Care Unit: A prospective pilot study of 20 patients
title_full_unstemmed Use of metabolic monitors in a multidisciplinary Intensive Care Unit: A prospective pilot study of 20 patients
title_short Use of metabolic monitors in a multidisciplinary Intensive Care Unit: A prospective pilot study of 20 patients
title_sort use of metabolic monitors in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit: a prospective pilot study of 20 patients
topic Brief Communication
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4578198/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26430340
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-5229.164804
work_keys_str_mv AT samratanvir useofmetabolicmonitorsinamultidisciplinaryintensivecareunitaprospectivepilotstudyof20patients
AT banerjeeneerja useofmetabolicmonitorsinamultidisciplinaryintensivecareunitaprospectivepilotstudyof20patients
AT guptaarushi useofmetabolicmonitorsinamultidisciplinaryintensivecareunitaprospectivepilotstudyof20patients