Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2440/113411
Citations
Scopus Web of ScienceĀ® Altmetric
?
?
Type: Journal article
Title: Nutrition therapy in Australia and New Zealand Intensive Care Units: An international comparison study
Author: Ridley, E.J.
Peake, S.L.
Jarvis, M.
Deane, A.M.
Lange, K.
Davies, A.R.
Chapman, M.
Heyland, D.
Citation: Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 2018; 42(8):1349-1357
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Issue Date: 2018
ISSN: 0148-6071
1941-2444
Statement of
Responsibility: 
Emma J. Ridley; Sandra L. Peake; Matthew Jarvis; Adam M. Deane; Kylie Lange; Andrew R. Davies; Marianne Chapman; and Daren Heyland
Abstract: The Augmented Versus Routine Approach to Giving Energy Trial (TARGET) is the largest blinded enteral nutrition (EN) intervention trial evaluating energy delivery to be conducted in the critically ill. To determine the external validity of TARGET results, nutrition practices in intensive care units (ICUs) in Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) are described and compared with international practices.This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data for the International Nutrition Surveys, 2007-2013. Data are presented as mean (SD).A total of 17,154 patients (ANZ: n = 2776 vs international n = 14,378) from 923 ICUs (146 and 777, respectively) were included. EN was the most common route of feeding (ANZ: 85%, n = 2365 patients vs international: 84%, n = 12,034; P = .258), and EN concentration was also similar (<1.25 kcal/mL ANZ: 70%, n = 12,396 vs international: 65%, n = 56,891 administrations; P < .001). Protein delivery was substantially below the estimated prescriptions but similar between the regions (0.6 [0.4] g/kg/day vs 0.6 [0.4] g/kg/day; P = .849). Patients in ANZ received slightly more energy (1133 [572] vs 948[536] kcal/day; P < .001), possibly because more energy was prescribed (1947 [348] vs 1747 [376] kcal/day; P < .001), nutrition protocols were more commonly used (98% vs 75%; P < .001) and included recommendations for therapies such as prokinetic agents (87% vs 51%, n = 399; P < .001) and small bowel feeding (62% vs 40%; P < .001) when compared with international ICUs.Key elements of nutrition practice are similar in ANZ and international ICUs. These data can be used to determine the external validity and relevance of TARGET results.
Keywords: critical illness; nutrition practice; nutrition therapy
Rights: 2018 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition
RMID: 0030086331
DOI: 10.1002/jpen.1163
Grant ID: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/1075288
Appears in Collections:Medicine publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.