Trial reportMedicine2018
A more physiological feeding process in ICU: Intermittent infusion with semi-solid nutrients (CONSORT-compliant).
Trial report in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03017079 (A More Physiological Feeding Process in ICU), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
A More Physiological Feeding Process in ICU:the Intermittent Infusion With Semi-solidification of Nutrients
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical effects and safety of semi-solid feeds in tube-fed patients: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Frontiers in nutrition · 2024Pooled it
- Preventive strategies for feeding intolerance among patients with severe traumatic brain injury: A cross-sectional survey.International journal of nursing sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND
objectivesThe goal of this study is to determine whether the application of semi-solid nutrients could increase the efficiency of the enteral nutrition (EN), which was measured daily by administered volume of nutrition/prescribed volume of nutrition.
methodsA total of 28 subjects were finally enrolled in the study and randomized to receive either intermittent feeding (IF) or intermittent feeding with semi-solid nutrients (IS). Three major parameters concerning EN were evaluated in this study: the daily dosage prescribed by doctor, the actual dosage received by subjects, and the acute complications such as diarrhea, vomiting, regurgitation, bowel distension, and lung infection.
resultsThere were no statistical differences in NRS-2002, and acute gastrointestinal injury between both groups. The IS group (0.98 ± 0.06, P < .01) could receive higher percentage of daily prescribed calories compared to IF (0.73 ± 0.15). The total caloric intake during the first 3 days was higher in IS (2589.29 ± 844.02 vs. 1685.71 ± 388.00, P < .01). The incidence of feeding intolerance (FI) was lower in the IS group (2/14) compared with IF (8/14). However, semi-solid nutrients did not decrease the length of stay, lung infection, or 30-day mortality. Similarly, there was no difference in glycemic variability and stress hyperglycemia.
conclusionsIn our cohort of critically ill subjects, the efficiency of the EN was increased by IS, which might be related to the improvement of FI (NCT03017079).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.