Cargando…
Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial
The appropriate strategy for enteral feeding remains a matter of debate. We hypothesized that continuous enteral feeding would result in higher rates of achieving target nutrition during the first 7 days compared with intermittent enteral feeding. We conducted an unblinded, single-center, parallel-g...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8839656/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35277023 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu14030664 |
_version_ | 1784650422762340352 |
---|---|
author | Lee, Hong-Yeul Lee, Jung-Kyu Kim, Hye-Jin Ju, Dal-Lae Lee, Sang-Min Lee, Jinwoo |
author_facet | Lee, Hong-Yeul Lee, Jung-Kyu Kim, Hye-Jin Ju, Dal-Lae Lee, Sang-Min Lee, Jinwoo |
author_sort | Lee, Hong-Yeul |
collection | PubMed |
description | The appropriate strategy for enteral feeding remains a matter of debate. We hypothesized that continuous enteral feeding would result in higher rates of achieving target nutrition during the first 7 days compared with intermittent enteral feeding. We conducted an unblinded, single-center, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial involving adult patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit who required mechanical ventilation to determine the efficacy and safety of continuous enteral feeding for critically ill patients compared with intermittent enteral feeding. The primary endpoint was the achievement of ≥80% of the target nutrition requirement during the first 7 days after starting enteral feeding. A total of 99 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (intermittent enteral feeding group, n = 49; continuous enteral feeding group, n = 50). The intermittent enteral feeding group and continuous enteral feeding group received 227 days and 226 days of enteral feeding, respectively. The achievement of ≥80% of the target nutrition requirement occurred significantly more frequently in the continuous enteral feeding group than in the intermittent enteral feeding group (65.0% versus 52.4%, respectively; relative risk, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–1.45; p = 0.008). For patients undergoing mechanical ventilation, continuous enteral feeding significantly improved the achievement of target nutrition requirements. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8839656 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88396562022-02-13 Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial Lee, Hong-Yeul Lee, Jung-Kyu Kim, Hye-Jin Ju, Dal-Lae Lee, Sang-Min Lee, Jinwoo Nutrients Article The appropriate strategy for enteral feeding remains a matter of debate. We hypothesized that continuous enteral feeding would result in higher rates of achieving target nutrition during the first 7 days compared with intermittent enteral feeding. We conducted an unblinded, single-center, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial involving adult patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit who required mechanical ventilation to determine the efficacy and safety of continuous enteral feeding for critically ill patients compared with intermittent enteral feeding. The primary endpoint was the achievement of ≥80% of the target nutrition requirement during the first 7 days after starting enteral feeding. A total of 99 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (intermittent enteral feeding group, n = 49; continuous enteral feeding group, n = 50). The intermittent enteral feeding group and continuous enteral feeding group received 227 days and 226 days of enteral feeding, respectively. The achievement of ≥80% of the target nutrition requirement occurred significantly more frequently in the continuous enteral feeding group than in the intermittent enteral feeding group (65.0% versus 52.4%, respectively; relative risk, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–1.45; p = 0.008). For patients undergoing mechanical ventilation, continuous enteral feeding significantly improved the achievement of target nutrition requirements. MDPI 2022-02-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8839656/ /pubmed/35277023 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu14030664 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Lee, Hong-Yeul Lee, Jung-Kyu Kim, Hye-Jin Ju, Dal-Lae Lee, Sang-Min Lee, Jinwoo Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial |
title | Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial |
title_full | Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial |
title_fullStr | Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial |
title_short | Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial |
title_sort | continuous versus intermittent enteral tube feeding for critically ill patients: a prospective, randomized controlled trial |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8839656/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35277023 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu14030664 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT leehongyeul continuousversusintermittententeraltubefeedingforcriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial AT leejungkyu continuousversusintermittententeraltubefeedingforcriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial AT kimhyejin continuousversusintermittententeraltubefeedingforcriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial AT judallae continuousversusintermittententeraltubefeedingforcriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial AT leesangmin continuousversusintermittententeraltubefeedingforcriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial AT leejinwoo continuousversusintermittententeraltubefeedingforcriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial |