Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34609621›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of nutrition2022

The cost effectiveness of personalized dietary advice to increase protein intake in older adults with lower habitual protein intake: a randomized controlled trial.

Ilse Reinders, Marjolein Visser, Satu K Jyväkorpi, Riikka T Niskanen, Judith E Bosmans, Ângela Jornada Ben, Ingeborg A Brouwer, Lothar D Kuijper, Margreet R Olthof, Kaisu H Pitkälä and 3 more

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT03712306 (The), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT03712306 nacompletednot on this map

The (Cost) Effectiveness of Increasing Daily Protein Intake to 1.2 Gram Per Kilo Body Weight on Physical Functioning in Community-dwelling Older Adults With a Habitual Daily Protein Intake < 1.0 Gram Per Kilo Body Weight

TypeinterventionalSponsorVU University of AmsterdamRan2018 to 2020Enrolled276ConditionsProtein-Energy Malnutrition, Physical DisabilityArmsDietary advice, Dietary advice and advice on timing
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Sarcopenia: how to determine and manage.Knee surgery & related research · 2025
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Ilse ReindersDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, and The Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, Room O-533, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2156-4254
Marjolein VisserDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, and The Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, Room O-533, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Satu K JyväkorpiDepartment of General Practice and Primary Health Care, and Helsinki University Central Hospital, Unit of Primary Health Care, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Riikka T NiskanenDepartment of General Practice and Primary Health Care, and Helsinki University Central Hospital, Unit of Primary Health Care, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Judith E BosmansDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, and The Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, Room O-533, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ângela Jornada BenDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, and The Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, Room O-533, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ingeborg A BrouwerDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, and The Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, Room O-533, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Lothar D KuijperDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, and The Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, Room O-533, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Margreet R OlthofDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, and The Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, Room O-533, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Kaisu H PitkäläDepartment of General Practice and Primary Health Care, and Helsinki University Central Hospital, Unit of Primary Health Care, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Rachel VijlbriefDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, and The Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, Room O-533, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Merja H SuominenDepartment of General Practice and Primary Health Care, and Helsinki University Central Hospital, Unit of Primary Health Care, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Hanneke A H WijnhovenDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, and The Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, Room O-533, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. hanneke.wijnhoven@vu.nl.

Funding

Horizon 2020 Framework Programme 678732
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo examine the cost effectiveness of dietary advice to increase protein intake on 6-month change in physical functioning among older adults.

methodsIn this multicenter randomized controlled trial, 276 community-dwelling older adults with a habitual protein intake < 1.0 g/kg adjusted body weight (aBW)/d were randomly assigned to either Intervention 1; advice to increase protein intake to ≥ 1.2 g/kg aBW/d (PROT, n = 96), Intervention 2; similar advice and in addition advice to consume protein (en)rich(ed) foods within half an hour after usual physical activity (PROT + TIMING, n = 89), or continue the habitual diet with no advice (CON, n = 91). Primary outcome was 6-month change in 400-m walk time. Secondary outcomes were 6-month change in physical performance, leg extension strength, grip strength, body composition, self-reported mobility limitations and quality of life. We evaluated cost effectiveness from a societal perspective.

resultsCompared to CON, a positive effect on walk time was observed for PROT;  - 12.4 s (95%CI,  - 21.8 to  - 2.9), and for PROT + TIMING;  - 4.9 s (95%CI,  - 14.5 to 4.7). Leg extension strength significantly increased in PROT (+ 32.6 N (95%CI, 10.6-54.5)) and PROT + TIMING (+ 24.3 N (95%CI, 0.2-48.5)) compared to CON. No significant intervention effects were observed for the other secondary outcomes. From a societal perspective, PROT was cost effective compared to CON.

conclusionDietary advice to increase protein intake to ≥ 1.2 g/kg aBW/d improved 400-m walk time and leg strength among older adults with a lower habitual protein intake. From a societal perspective, PROT was considered cost-effective compared to CON. These findings support the need for re-evaluating the protein RDA of 0.8 g/kg BW/d for older adults.

trial registrationThe trial has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03712306). Date of registration: October 2018. Registry name: The (Cost) Effectiveness of Increasing Protein Intake on Physical Functioning in Older Adults. Trial Identifier: NCT03712306.

Indexed as

Nutrition TherapyQuality of LifeAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisExerciseHumansIndependent Living400 m walkPhysical functioningProtein intakeProtein recommendationRCTTiming

Identifiers

PMID34609621
PMCPMC8490609

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.