scholarly journals Impact of Propofol Sedation upon Caloric Overfeeding and Protein Inadequacy in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Nutrition Support

Pharmacy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 121
Author(s):  
Roland N. Dickerson ◽  
Christopher T. Buckley

Propofol, a commonly used sedative in the intensive care unit, is formulated in a 10% lipid emulsion that contributes 1.1 kcals per mL. As a result, propofol can significantly contribute to caloric intake and can potentially result in complications of overfeeding for patients who receive concurrent enteral or parenteral nutrition therapy. In order to avoid potential overfeeding, some clinicians have empirically decreased the infusion rate of the nutrition therapy, which also may have detrimental effects since protein intake may be inadequate. The purpose of this review is to examine the current literature regarding these issues and provide some practical suggestions on how to restrict caloric intake to avoid overfeeding and simultaneously enhance protein intake for patients who receive either parenteral or enteral nutrition for those patients receiving concurrent propofol therapy.

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (7) ◽  
pp. 615-626 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angel Joel Cadena ◽  
Sara Habib ◽  
Fred Rincon ◽  
Stephanie Dobak

Malnutrition is frequently seen among patients in the intensive care unit. Evidence shows that optimal nutritional support can lead to better clinical outcomes. Recent clinical trials debate over the efficacy of enteral nutrition (EN) over parenteral nutrition (PN). Multiple trials have studied the impact of EN versus PN in terms of health-care cost and clinical outcomes (including functional status, cost, infectious complications, mortality risk, length of hospital and intensive care unit stay, and mechanical ventilation duration). The aim of this review is to address the question: In critically ill adult patients requiring nutrition support, does EN compared to PN favorably impact clinical outcomes and health-care costs?


2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 16-26
Author(s):  
Angela Bonomo ◽  
Diane Lynn Blume ◽  
Katie Davis ◽  
Hee Jun Kim

Background At least 80% of ordered enteral nutrition should be delivered to improve outcomes in critical care patients. However, these patients typically receive 60% to 70% of ordered enteral nutrition volume. In a practice review within a 28-bed medical-surgical adult intensive care unit, patients received a median of 67.5% of ordered enteral nutrition with standard rate-based feeding. Volume-based feeding is recommended to deliver adequate enteral nutrition to critically ill patients. Objective To use a quality improvement project to increase the volume of enteral nutrition delivered in the medical-surgical intensive care unit. Methods Percentages of target volume achieved were monitored in 73 patients. Comparisons between the rate-based and volume-based feeding groups used nonparametric quality of medians test or the χ2 test. A customized volume-based feeding protocol and order set were created according to published protocols and then implemented. Standardized education included lecture, demonstration, written material, and active personal involvement, followed by a scenario-based test to apply learning. Results Immediately after implementation of this practice change, delivered enteral nutrition volume increased, resulting in a median delivery of 99.8% of ordered volume (P = .003). Delivery of a mean of 98% ordered volume was sustained over the 15 months following implementation. Conclusions Implementation of volume-based feeding optimized enteral nutrition delivery to critically ill patients in this medical-surgical intensive care unit. This success can be attributed to a comprehensive, individualized, and proactive process design and educational approach. The process can be adapted to quality improvement initiatives with other patient populations and units.


2021 ◽  
Vol 34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luciana Carla HOLZBACH ◽  
Renata Andrade de Medeiros MOREIRA ◽  
Renata Junqueira PEREIRA

ABSTRACT Objective To associate quality indicators in nutritional therapy and pre-determined clinical outcomes in a neonatal unit. Methods A total of 81 premature newborns were monitored regarding the time to initiate nutrition therapy, time to meet energy needs, energy and protein adequacy, cumulative energy deficit, adequacy of the nutritional formula and fasting periods; weight gain, the occurrence of necrotizing enterocolitis, mortality and length of stay in the intensive care unit. The data were analyzed with the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences at 5% significance level. Results The time to start enteral nutrition and the calories infused/kg/day were predictors of length of hospital stay F(2.46)=6.148; p=0.004; R2=0.211; as well as the cumulative energy deficit+birth weight+infused calories/kg/day (F=3.52; p<0.001; R2=0.422); cumulative energy deficit+calories infused/kg/day+fasting time for Enteral Nutrition (F=15.041; p<0.001; R2=0.474) were predictors of weight gain. The time to start enteral nutrition, gestational age and birth weight were inversely associated with the occurrence of necrotizing enterocolitis (β=-0.38; β=-0.198; β=-0.002). Early enteral nutrition predisposed to mortality (β=0.33). Gestational age, birth weight and calories infused/kg/day were inversely related to mortality (β=-0.442; β=-0.004; β=-0.08). Conclusions Considering the associations between indicators and outcomes, routine monitoring of the time to start enteral nutrition, energy adequacy, energy deficit and fasting time is recommended.


Author(s):  
A.K. Gergen ◽  
P. Hosokawa ◽  
C. Irwin ◽  
M.J. Cohen ◽  
F.L. Wright ◽  
...  

Objectives: Elderly patients requiring emergency general surgery (EGS) are at high risk for complications due to preexisting malnutrition. Thus, correcting nutritional deficits perioperatively is essential to improve outcomes. However, even in patients unable to tolerate enteral nutrition, initiation of parenteral nutrition (PN) is often delayed due to concerns of associated complications. In this study, we hypothesized that in elderly EGS patients with relative short-term contraindications to enteral nutrition, early administration of PN is as safe as delayed administration. Furthermore, early PN may improve outcomes by enhancing caloric intake and combatting malnutrition in the immediate perioperative period. Design and Setting: A single-institution, retrospective review was performed at a quaternary academic medical center. Participants: Participants consisted of 58 elderly patients >65 years of age admitted to the EGS service who required PN between July 2017 and July 2020. Measurements: Postoperative outcomes of patients started on PN on hospital day 0-3 (early initiation) were compared to patients started on PN on hospital day 4 or later (late initiation). Bivariate analysis was conducted using the Chi-square or Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables and the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test and F-test for continuous variables. Results: Fifty-eight patients met inclusion criteria, with 27 (46.6%) patients receiving early PN and 31 (53.4%) receiving late PN. Both groups shared similar baseline characteristics, including degree of frailty, body mass index, and nutritional status at time of admission. Complications associated with PN administration were negligible, with no instances of central venous catheter insertion-related complications, catheter-associated bloodstream infection, or factors leading to early termination of PN therapy. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the early administration group met 60% of their caloric goal within 72 hours of admission (62.9% versus 19.5%, p=0.0007). Patients receiving late PN demonstrated a significantly higher rate of unplanned admission to the intensive care unit (38.7% versus 14.8%, p=0.04). Moreover, there was a 21.5% reduction in mortality among patients in the early initiation group compared to patients in the late initiation group (33.3% versus 54.8%, p=0.10). Conclusions: Early initiation of PN in hospitalized elderly EGS patients was not associated with increased adverse events compared to patients undergoing delayed PN administration. Furthermore, patients receiving early PN demonstrated a 2.6-fold decrease in the rate of unplanned admission to the intensive care unit and trended toward improved mortality. Based on these results, further prospective studies are warranted to further explore the safety and potential benefits of early PN administration in elderly surgical patients unable to receive enteral nutrition.


2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-127
Author(s):  
Volkan Özen ◽  
Aylin Aydin Sayilan ◽  
Miray Turkoglu ◽  
Dilek Mut ◽  
Samet Sayilan ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Jonathan Cohen ◽  
Shaul Lev

Parenteral nutrition (PN) is a technique of artificial nutrition support, which consists of the intravenous administration of macronutrients, micronutrients, and water. PN has become integrated into intensive care unit (ICU) patient management with the aim of preventing energy deficits and preserving lean body mass. The addition of PN to enteral nutrition is known as supplemental PN. Parenteral feeding should be considered whenever enteral nutritional support is contraindicated, or when enteral nutrition alone is unable to meet energy and nutrient requirements. International guidelines differ considerably regarding the indications for PN. Thus, the ESPEN guidelines recommend initiating PN in critically-ill patients who do not meet caloric goals within 2–3 days of commencing EN, while the Canadian guidelines recommend PN only after extensive attempts to feed with EN have failed. The ASPEN guidelines advocate administering PN after 8 days of attempting EN unsuccessfully. Several studies have demonstrated that parenteral glutamine supplementation may improve outcome, and the ESPEN guidelines give a grade A recommendation to the use of glutamine in critically-ill patients who receive PN. Studies on IV omega-3 fatty acids have yielded promising results in animal models of acute respiratory distress syndrome and proved superior to solutions with omega -6 compositions. The discrepancy between animal models and clinical practice could be related to different time frames.


2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 396-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Friederike Compton ◽  
Christian Bojarski ◽  
Britta Siegmund ◽  
Markus van der Giet

BackgroundEarly enteral nutrition is recommended for patients in intensive care units, but nutrition provision is often hindered by a variety of unit-specific problems.ObjectivesTo evaluate the impact of a nutrition support protocol on nutrition prescription and delivery in the intensive care unit.MethodsNutrition-related data from 73 patients receiving mechanical ventilation who were treated in an adult medical intensive care unit before introduction of an enteral nutrition support protocol were retrospectively compared with data for 87 patients admitted after implementation of the protocol.ResultsAfter implementation of the protocol, enteral nutrition was started significantly earlier (P = .007) and enteral feeding goals were reached significantly faster (6 vs 10 days, P &lt; .001) than before. Prescription of enteral nutrition on the first day of invasive mechanical ventilation increased from 38% before to 54% after (P = .03) implementation of the protocol. Prescribed and delivered nutrition doses on the first 2 days of mechanical ventilation also increased significantly (P &lt; .001) after the protocol was implemented. Nasojejunal feeding tubes were used in 52% of patients before and 56% of patients after protocol implementation P = .63). Jejunal tubes were placed earlier after the protocol was implemented than before (median 5 vs 6.5 days), and when a jejunal tube was in place, feeding goals were reached faster (median 2 vs 3 days, P = .002).ConclusionImplementing an enteral nutrition support protocol shortened the time to reach feeding goals. Jejunal feeding tubes were necessary in more than half of the patients, and with a jejunal feeding tube in place, feeding goals were reached rapidly.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (35) ◽  
pp. 187-192
Author(s):  
Ivens Augusto Oliveira de Souza

Gastrointestinal dysfunction and inadequate nutrient intake are frequently seen in critically ill patients. Recent studies have shown that parenteral nutrition is safe among these patients. This narrative review aims to describe the risks associated with overfeeding and how to safely indicate and implement parenteral nutrition in the intensive care unit. After the acute phase of critical illness, individualized parenteral nutrition, using indirect calorimetry and balanced lipid emulsions, may be associated with better outcomes. The demand for ready-to-use bags has been growing intended to achieve the best value of care for patients and healthcare institutions.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. e041799
Author(s):  
Mickael Landais ◽  
Mai-Anh Nay ◽  
Johann Auchabie ◽  
Noemie Hubert ◽  
Anne Rebion ◽  
...  

IntroductionFasting is frequently imposed to patients before extubation in the intensive care unit based on scheduled surgery guidelines. This practice has never been evaluated among critically ill patients and may delay extubation, increase nursing workload and reduce caloric intake. We are hypothesising that continuous enteral nutrition until extubation represents a safe alternative compared with fasting prior to extubation in the intensive care unit.Methods and analysisAdult patients ventilated more than 48 hours and receiving pre-pyloric enteral nutrition for more than 24 hours are included in this open-label cluster randomised parallel group non-inferiority trial. The participating centres are randomised allocated to continued enteral nutrition until extubation or 6-hour fasting (with concomitant gastric suctioning when feasible) prior to extubation. The primary outcome is extubation failure (ie, reintubation within 7 days following extubation).Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the national ethics review board (comité de protection, des personnes Sud Mediterranée III No 2017.10.02 bis) and patients are included after informed consent. Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03335345).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document