Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27891355›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR2016

The Effect of Continuous Enteral Nutrition on Nutrition Indices, Compared to the Intermittent and Combination Enteral Nutrition in Traumatic Brain Injury Patients.

Sakine Mazaherpur, Alireza Khatony, Alireza Abdi, Yahia Pasdar, Farid Najafi

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Sakine MazaherpurMSc of Critical Care Nursing, Nursing Department, Faculty of Nursing & Midwifery, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences , Kermanshah, Iran .
Alireza KhatonyAssociate Professor in Nursing Education, Nursing Department, Faculty of Nursing & Midwifery, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences , Kermanshah, Iran .
Alireza AbdiPhD of Nursing, Nursing Department, Faculty of Nursing & Midwifery, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences , Kermanshah, Iran .
Yahia PasdarAssistant Professor in Nutrition Science, Nutrition Department, Public Health College, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences , Kermanshah, Iran .
Farid NajafiProfessor in Epidemiology, Statistics and Epidemiology Department, Research and Technology center, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences , Kermanshah, Iran .

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionNutrition support is one of the most common care, which is undertaken for patients who suffered from Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and are admitted in intensive care units. Literature indicates some controversies regarding the appropriate method of nutrition support in these patients.

aimThis study was conducted for determining the effect of continuous enteral nutrition on nutrition indices, compared to the intermittent enteral and combination nutrition in TBI patients. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn a randomized clinical trial, 60 TBI patients who were admitted to critical care units of Taleghani Hospital of Kermanshah-Iran in 2010 recruited to the study. The samples were allocated to three groups of continuous enteral nutrition, intermittent enteral nutrition and combination nutrition supports by random sampling. The tool was a researcher-made checklist. The three methods of nutrition support were performed to the participants, then nutrition indices of patients were measured before and during three weeks. Data were analysed using SPSS software, descriptive, and inferential statistics.

resultsThe mean of received energy in the combination group (53.1± 18.3%) was higher than continuous (38.5±19.7%) and intermittent (32.2±14.7%) groups, significantly (p<0.001). The received protein was also greater in combination method (67.7±16.9%) than continuous (31.8±15.1%) and intermittent groups (17.2±10.1%), (p=0.001). The mean of nitrogen balance was improved in continuous method from -4.7± -1.6 to 7.2±5.2, (p<0.001) significantly.

conclusionIn this study, received energy of patients was not enough by three methods. However, the continuous method, having a positive effect on nitrogen balance, reducing hypercatabolism and maintaining the total body protein, was preferred to brain injury patients compared with intermittent enteral and parenteral methods that demand more studies.

Indexed as

Intensive care unitsMortalityNutritional support

Identifiers

PMID27891355
PMCPMC5121693

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.