Cargando…
Optimized calorie and high protein intake versus recommended caloric-protein intake in critically ill patients: a prospective, randomized, controlled phase II clinical trial
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate differences in outcomes for an optimized calorie and high protein nutrition therapy versus standard nutrition care in critically ill adult patients. METHODS: We randomized patients expected to stay in the intensive care unit for at least 3 days. In the optimized calorie and hi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira -
AMIB
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6649219/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31141081 http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/0103-507X.20190025 |
_version_ | 1783438001474371584 |
---|---|
author | de Azevedo, José Raimundo Araújo Lima, Hugo Cesar Martins Montenegro, Widlani Sousa Souza, Suellen Christine de Carvalho Nogueira, Ivna Raquel Olimpio Moreira Silva, Marilia Martins Muniz, Nicolli de Araujo |
author_facet | de Azevedo, José Raimundo Araújo Lima, Hugo Cesar Martins Montenegro, Widlani Sousa Souza, Suellen Christine de Carvalho Nogueira, Ivna Raquel Olimpio Moreira Silva, Marilia Martins Muniz, Nicolli de Araujo |
author_sort | de Azevedo, José Raimundo Araújo |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To evaluate differences in outcomes for an optimized calorie and high protein nutrition therapy versus standard nutrition care in critically ill adult patients. METHODS: We randomized patients expected to stay in the intensive care unit for at least 3 days. In the optimized calorie and high protein nutrition group, caloric intake was determined by indirect calorimetry, and protein intake was established at 2.0 to 2.2g/kg/day. The control group received 25kcal/kg/day of calories and 1.4 to 1.5g/kg/day protein. The primary outcome was the physical component summary score obtained at 3 and 6 months. Secondary outcomes included handgrip strength at intensive care unit discharge, duration of mechanical ventilation and hospital mortality. RESULTS: In total, 120 patients were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference between the two groups in calories received. However, the amount of protein received by the optimized calorie and high protein nutrition group was significantly higher compared with the control group. The physical component summary score at 3 and 6 months did not differ between the two groups nor did secondary outcomes. However, after adjusting for covariates, a negative delta protein (protein received minus predetermined protein requirement) was associated with a lower physical component summary score at 3 and 6 months postrandomization. CONCLUSION: In this study optimized calorie and high protein strategy did not appear to improve physical quality of life compared with standard nutrition care. However, after adjusting for covariates, a negative delta protein was associated with a lower physical component summary score at 3 and 6 months postrandomization. This association exists independently of the method of calculation of protein target. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6649219 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira -
AMIB |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66492192019-07-29 Optimized calorie and high protein intake versus recommended caloric-protein intake in critically ill patients: a prospective, randomized, controlled phase II clinical trial de Azevedo, José Raimundo Araújo Lima, Hugo Cesar Martins Montenegro, Widlani Sousa Souza, Suellen Christine de Carvalho Nogueira, Ivna Raquel Olimpio Moreira Silva, Marilia Martins Muniz, Nicolli de Araujo Rev Bras Ter Intensiva Original Article OBJECTIVE: To evaluate differences in outcomes for an optimized calorie and high protein nutrition therapy versus standard nutrition care in critically ill adult patients. METHODS: We randomized patients expected to stay in the intensive care unit for at least 3 days. In the optimized calorie and high protein nutrition group, caloric intake was determined by indirect calorimetry, and protein intake was established at 2.0 to 2.2g/kg/day. The control group received 25kcal/kg/day of calories and 1.4 to 1.5g/kg/day protein. The primary outcome was the physical component summary score obtained at 3 and 6 months. Secondary outcomes included handgrip strength at intensive care unit discharge, duration of mechanical ventilation and hospital mortality. RESULTS: In total, 120 patients were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference between the two groups in calories received. However, the amount of protein received by the optimized calorie and high protein nutrition group was significantly higher compared with the control group. The physical component summary score at 3 and 6 months did not differ between the two groups nor did secondary outcomes. However, after adjusting for covariates, a negative delta protein (protein received minus predetermined protein requirement) was associated with a lower physical component summary score at 3 and 6 months postrandomization. CONCLUSION: In this study optimized calorie and high protein strategy did not appear to improve physical quality of life compared with standard nutrition care. However, after adjusting for covariates, a negative delta protein was associated with a lower physical component summary score at 3 and 6 months postrandomization. This association exists independently of the method of calculation of protein target. Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira - AMIB 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6649219/ /pubmed/31141081 http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/0103-507X.20190025 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article de Azevedo, José Raimundo Araújo Lima, Hugo Cesar Martins Montenegro, Widlani Sousa Souza, Suellen Christine de Carvalho Nogueira, Ivna Raquel Olimpio Moreira Silva, Marilia Martins Muniz, Nicolli de Araujo Optimized calorie and high protein intake versus recommended caloric-protein intake in critically ill patients: a prospective, randomized, controlled phase II clinical trial |
title | Optimized calorie and high protein intake versus
recommended caloric-protein intake in critically ill patients: a prospective,
randomized, controlled phase II clinical trial |
title_full | Optimized calorie and high protein intake versus
recommended caloric-protein intake in critically ill patients: a prospective,
randomized, controlled phase II clinical trial |
title_fullStr | Optimized calorie and high protein intake versus
recommended caloric-protein intake in critically ill patients: a prospective,
randomized, controlled phase II clinical trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Optimized calorie and high protein intake versus
recommended caloric-protein intake in critically ill patients: a prospective,
randomized, controlled phase II clinical trial |
title_short | Optimized calorie and high protein intake versus
recommended caloric-protein intake in critically ill patients: a prospective,
randomized, controlled phase II clinical trial |
title_sort | optimized calorie and high protein intake versus
recommended caloric-protein intake in critically ill patients: a prospective,
randomized, controlled phase ii clinical trial |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6649219/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31141081 http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/0103-507X.20190025 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT deazevedojoseraimundoaraujo optimizedcalorieandhighproteinintakeversusrecommendedcaloricproteinintakeincriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledphaseiiclinicaltrial AT limahugocesarmartins optimizedcalorieandhighproteinintakeversusrecommendedcaloricproteinintakeincriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledphaseiiclinicaltrial AT montenegrowidlanisousa optimizedcalorieandhighproteinintakeversusrecommendedcaloricproteinintakeincriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledphaseiiclinicaltrial AT souzasuellenchristinedecarvalho optimizedcalorieandhighproteinintakeversusrecommendedcaloricproteinintakeincriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledphaseiiclinicaltrial AT nogueiraivnaraquelolimpiomoreira optimizedcalorieandhighproteinintakeversusrecommendedcaloricproteinintakeincriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledphaseiiclinicaltrial AT silvamariliamartins optimizedcalorieandhighproteinintakeversusrecommendedcaloricproteinintakeincriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledphaseiiclinicaltrial AT muniznicollidearaujo optimizedcalorieandhighproteinintakeversusrecommendedcaloricproteinintakeincriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledphaseiiclinicaltrial |