Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26416253›Full record

Trial reportTrials2015

A cluster randomised feasibility trial evaluating nutritional interventions in the treatment of malnutrition in care home adult residents.

Ruth Stow, Natalie Ives, Christina Smith, Caroline Rick, Alison Rushton

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ruth StowHealth Research MRes, University of Birmingham, School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. ruth.stow@nottingham.ac.uk.
Natalie IvesUniversity of Birmingham, Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Public Health Building, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. n.j.ives@bham.ac.uk.
Christina SmithUniversity College London (UCL), Language & Communication Div of Psychology & Language Sciences, 202d Chandler House, 2 Wakefield Street, London, WC1N 1PF, UK. Christina.smith@ucl.ac.uk.
Caroline RickUniversity of Birmingham, Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Public Health Building, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. c.e.rick@bham.ac.uk.
Alison RushtonUniversity of Birmingham, School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. a.b.rushton@bham.ac.uk.
University of Birmingham · GBLanguage Science (South Korea) · KRUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProtein energy malnutrition (PEM) predisposes individuals to disease, delays recovery from illness and reduces quality of life. Care home residents in the United Kingdom are especially vulnerable, with an estimated 30 to 42 % at risk. Evidence for nutritional interventions to address PEM in the care home setting is lacking. Widely used techniques include food-based intervention and/or the use of prescribed oral nutritional supplements. To define outcomes and optimise the design for an adequately powered definitive trial to compare the efficacy of established nutritional interventions in this setting, a cluster randomised feasibility trial with a 6-month intervention was undertaken.

methodsCare home residents with or at risk of malnutrition were identified across six UK care home sites from September to December 2013. Homes were cluster randomised to standard care (SC), food-based intervention (FB) or oral nutritional supplement intervention (ONS), for 6 months. Key outcomes were trial feasibility and the acceptability of design, allocated interventions and outcome assessments. Anthropometry, dietary intake, healthcare resource usage and participant-reported outcome measures were assessed at baseline and at 3 and 6 months.

resultsAll six care homes approached were recruited and retained. Of the 110 residents at risk of malnutrition, 85 % entered the trial, and 68 % completed the 6-month intervention. Pre-specified success criteria for feasibility were met for recruitment and retention, intervention acceptability (resident compliance ≥60 %) and measurement of weight, body mass index (BMI), mid-upper arm circumference and dietary intake (data completeness >80 %). Measurement of handgrip strength and triceps skinfold thickness was not found to be feasible in this population. The 95 % confidence interval (CI) data suggested sensitivity to change in dietary intake for weight, BMI and energy intake between baseline and 3 months when each intervention (FB and ONS) was compared with SC.

conclusionsA definitive trial comparing the efficacy of nutritional support interventions in increasing weight and BMI in malnourished care home residents can be conducted. However, whilst the design was feasible, this trial has highlighted the lack of clinically and patient-relevant outcome measures that are appropriate for use in this setting for both research and clinical practice. In particular, this trial identified a need for a more simple measure of functional status, which considers the limitations of functional tests in the care home population.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN38047922 , Date assigned: 22 April 2014.

Indexed as

Dietary ServicesDietary SupplementsEnteral NutritionHomes for the AgedNutritional StatusResidential FacilitiesAdministration, OralAgedBody Mass IndexEatingEnergy IntakeEnglandFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID26416253
PMCPMC4587829
OpenAlexW2152707686

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.