Increased Efficacy and Safety of Enteral Nutrition Support with a Protocol (ASNET) in Noncritical Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Use and safety of enteral nutrition protocols in acute care: A scoping review of literature and retrospective audit of practice

AIM

Standardised enteral nutrition protocols are recommended in critical care, however their use and safety are not well described in other inpatient populations. This mixed methods study reports on the use and safety of enteral nutrition protocols for non-critically ill adults.

METHODS

A scoping review of published literature was conducted. In addition a retrospective audit of practice at an Australian tertiary teaching hospital with an existing hospital-wide standardised enteral nutrition protocol was performed. Data on use, safety and adequacy of enteral nutrition prescription were collected from medical records for patients receiving enteral nutrition on acute wards (January-March 2020).

RESULTS

Screening of 9298 records yielded six primary research articles. Studies were generally low quality. Published literature suggested that protocols may reduce time to enteral nutrition initiation and goal rate, and improve adequacy of nutrition provision. No adverse outcomes were reported. From the local audit of practice (105 admissions, 98 patients), enteral nutrition commencement was timely (median 0 (IQR 0-1) days from request; goal rate: median 1 (IQR 0-2) days from commencement and adequate (nil underfeeding), without prior dietitian review in 82% of cases. Enteral nutrition was commenced per protocol in 61% of instances. No adverse events, including refeeding syndrome, were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Most inpatients requiring enteral nutrition can be safely and adequately managed on enteral nutrition protocols. Evaluation of protocols outside of the critical care setting remains a gap in the literature. Standardised enteral nutrition protocols may improve delivery of nutrition to patients, whilst allowing dietitians to focus on those with specialised nutrition support needs.

Characteristics of patients receiving nutrition care and its associations with prognosis in a tertiary hospital

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe the medical nutritional therapy (MNT) of adult non-critically ill hospitalization patients.

METHODS

In a retrospective study, adults hospitalized for more than 48 h in non-intensive care unit medical and surgical areas that were classified as being at nutritional risk were included. Malnutrition was defined according to Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 255 patients, aged 54.13±18.4 years, who were at risk of malnutrition were included in this study. Of these, 50% were males. Notably, 52.5% received oral nutrition supplementation (ONS), 23.5% enteral nutrition (EN), 15% parenteral nutrition (PN), and 9% received enteral and parenteral nutrition (EPN). Patients with EPN presented the highest frequency of malnutrition (52%), and therefore they received more than 100% of energy and protein requirements. The median length of stay was 25 days. Among patients with nutritional risk receiving EPN, no deaths occurred. Patients, identified at nutritional risk, but without malnutrition according to GLIM, and receiving ONS had significantly lower mortality than patients receiving other MNT.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral nutrition supplementation was the more frequent MNT prescribed. The frequency of malnutrition and percentage of prescribed energy and protein were higher in patients receiving PN and EPN compared with those receiving ONS.

Is the risk of refeeding syndrome a problem in reaching nutritional requirements? A cohort of patients on enteral nutrition support

BACKGROUND

refeeding syndrome (RS) is a metabolic complication associated with nutritional support. The lack of management protocols for patients on nutritional support may lead to the development of RS or undernourishment.

OBJECTIVE

to evaluate adherence to the algorithm for total enteral nutritional support (ASNET), and the efficacy of reaching nutrient requirements in patients at risk of RS.

METHODS

a cohort study: screening and nutritional evaluation of patients and risk of RS were performed. Adults admitted to hospital for noncritical illness who received exclusively enteral nutrition (EN) were eligible. Patients with RS, intestinal failure or chronic diarrhea were excluded. Adherence to ASNET was evaluated along with the efficacy of nutritional support to reach the optimal protein and energy requirement (OPER) and any associated complications. Patient follow-up ended when the feeding route was changed or upon discharge.

RESULTS

a total of 73 patients were included (mean age, 62 ± 16 yrs; BMI, 18.5 ± 4.2 kg/m2), and 55 % were men. All had nutritional risk of developing RS (57, low; 15, high; 1, very high); 34 % had adequate adherence to ASNET, and 33 % managed to cover the total requirement between 4 and 6 days. OPER was reached by 38 % by the fourth day of EN, and adequate adherence to ASNET increased the probability of achieving it (RR, 2.2; 95 % CI, 1.6-3.2, p < 0.0001) without increasing the associated complications. Nonetheless, 36 % developed complications, of whom 96 % did not adhere to ASNET.

CONCLUSION

adherence to ASNET in patients at risk of RS allowed the achievement of OPER safely by day four with fewer associated complications.