重症患者蛋白质摄入量与功能能力之间的关系:一项回顾性队列研究。

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition Pub Date : 2024-07-17 DOI:10.1002/jpen.2673
Fábio Araújo RD, MHS, Juan G. Posadas-Calleja MD, MSc, Maitreyi Raman MD, MSc, Maureen Tosh PT, Paul Wischmeyer MD, Priscilla Barreto RD, Chelsia Gillis RD, PhD
{"title":"重症患者蛋白质摄入量与功能能力之间的关系:一项回顾性队列研究。","authors":"Fábio Araújo RD, MHS,&nbsp;Juan G. Posadas-Calleja MD, MSc,&nbsp;Maitreyi Raman MD, MSc,&nbsp;Maureen Tosh PT,&nbsp;Paul Wischmeyer MD,&nbsp;Priscilla Barreto RD,&nbsp;Chelsia Gillis RD, PhD","doi":"10.1002/jpen.2673","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Intensive care unit (ICU) protein benchmarks are based on mortality and morbidity; whether these targets also support functional recovery is unknown. We assessed whether different protein doses influenced patients' functional capacity, measured by the Chelsea Physical Assessment score (CPAx).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Single-center retrospective cohort study on ICU survivors with length of stay ≥7 days admitted between October 2014 and September 2020. Eligible patients were divided according to protein intake (g/kg/day): <i>low</i> (&lt;0.8), <i>medium</i> (0.8–1.19), <i>high</i> (1.2–1.5), and <i>very high</i> (&gt;1.5). Protein dose effect on CPAx was assessed at ICU discharge with analysis of covariance adjusting for age, illness severity, hospital length of stay before ICU admission, time to start nutrition support, and mechanical ventilation duration. We also investigated effect modification by energy intake and nutrition status.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Enrolled patients (<i>n</i> = 531) were similar for age, nutrition status, and illness severity across groups. CPAxs were nonlinearly associated with protein doses and similar among <i>low</i>, <i>medium</i>, and <i>very high</i> groups. The CPAx for the <i>high</i> group was statistically different (<i>P</i> = 0.014), indicating that the data of three groups could be pooled. Mean CPAx difference remained statistically significant after adjusting for confounding variables (3.9 ± 1.8, <i>P</i> = 0.029 in the four-group model, and 2.7 ± 0.9, <i>P</i> = 0.003 in the pooled two-group model). Energy intake was equivalent between groups and did not modify CPAx. The <i>high</i> group had superior CPAx in both well-nourished and malnourished patients, indicating nutrition status was not an effect modifier.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Protein dose 1.2–1.5 g/kg/day was associated with superior functional capacity at ICU discharge compared with other doses. Neither energy intake nor nutrition status modified functional capacity across groups; therefore, the results appear to be influenced by 1.2–1.5 g/kg/day.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16668,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition","volume":"48 7","pages":"850-860"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Association between protein intake and functional capacity in critically ill patients: A retrospective cohort study\",\"authors\":\"Fábio Araújo RD, MHS,&nbsp;Juan G. Posadas-Calleja MD, MSc,&nbsp;Maitreyi Raman MD, MSc,&nbsp;Maureen Tosh PT,&nbsp;Paul Wischmeyer MD,&nbsp;Priscilla Barreto RD,&nbsp;Chelsia Gillis RD, PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jpen.2673\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Intensive care unit (ICU) protein benchmarks are based on mortality and morbidity; whether these targets also support functional recovery is unknown. We assessed whether different protein doses influenced patients' functional capacity, measured by the Chelsea Physical Assessment score (CPAx).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Single-center retrospective cohort study on ICU survivors with length of stay ≥7 days admitted between October 2014 and September 2020. Eligible patients were divided according to protein intake (g/kg/day): <i>low</i> (&lt;0.8), <i>medium</i> (0.8–1.19), <i>high</i> (1.2–1.5), and <i>very high</i> (&gt;1.5). Protein dose effect on CPAx was assessed at ICU discharge with analysis of covariance adjusting for age, illness severity, hospital length of stay before ICU admission, time to start nutrition support, and mechanical ventilation duration. We also investigated effect modification by energy intake and nutrition status.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Enrolled patients (<i>n</i> = 531) were similar for age, nutrition status, and illness severity across groups. CPAxs were nonlinearly associated with protein doses and similar among <i>low</i>, <i>medium</i>, and <i>very high</i> groups. The CPAx for the <i>high</i> group was statistically different (<i>P</i> = 0.014), indicating that the data of three groups could be pooled. Mean CPAx difference remained statistically significant after adjusting for confounding variables (3.9 ± 1.8, <i>P</i> = 0.029 in the four-group model, and 2.7 ± 0.9, <i>P</i> = 0.003 in the pooled two-group model). Energy intake was equivalent between groups and did not modify CPAx. The <i>high</i> group had superior CPAx in both well-nourished and malnourished patients, indicating nutrition status was not an effect modifier.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Protein dose 1.2–1.5 g/kg/day was associated with superior functional capacity at ICU discharge compared with other doses. Neither energy intake nor nutrition status modified functional capacity across groups; therefore, the results appear to be influenced by 1.2–1.5 g/kg/day.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16668,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition\",\"volume\":\"48 7\",\"pages\":\"850-860\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jpen.2673\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jpen.2673","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:重症监护病房(ICU)的蛋白质基准以死亡率和发病率为基础,但这些目标是否也有助于功能恢复还不得而知。我们评估了不同的蛋白质剂量是否会影响患者的功能能力(以切尔西体能评估评分(CPAx)来衡量):单中心回顾性队列研究,对象为 2014 年 10 月至 2020 年 9 月期间入住 ICU 且住院时间≥7 天的幸存者。符合条件的患者根据蛋白质摄入量(克/千克/天)分为:低(1.5)。在 ICU 出院时评估蛋白质剂量对 CPAx 的影响,并进行协方差分析,调整年龄、病情严重程度、入 ICU 前的住院时间、开始营养支持的时间和机械通气持续时间。我们还研究了能量摄入和营养状况对效果的影响:各组入选患者(n = 531)的年龄、营养状况和病情严重程度相似。CPAx与蛋白质剂量呈非线性关系,低、中、高组之间相似。高剂量组的 CPAx 有统计学差异(P = 0.014),表明三组的数据可以合并。调整混杂变量后,平均 CPAx 差异仍有统计学意义(四组模型中为 3.9 ± 1.8,P = 0.029;两组集合模型中为 2.7 ± 0.9,P = 0.003)。各组之间的能量摄入量相同,不会改变 CPAx。高剂量组在营养良好和营养不良的患者中都有较好的 CPAx,这表明营养状况不是影响因素:结论:与其他剂量相比,蛋白质剂量为 1.2-1.5 克/公斤/天的患者在重症监护室出院时的功能能力更强。能量摄入和营养状况都不会改变各组的功能能力;因此,结果似乎受到 1.2-1.5 克/公斤/天的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Association between protein intake and functional capacity in critically ill patients: A retrospective cohort study

Background

Intensive care unit (ICU) protein benchmarks are based on mortality and morbidity; whether these targets also support functional recovery is unknown. We assessed whether different protein doses influenced patients' functional capacity, measured by the Chelsea Physical Assessment score (CPAx).

Methods

Single-center retrospective cohort study on ICU survivors with length of stay ≥7 days admitted between October 2014 and September 2020. Eligible patients were divided according to protein intake (g/kg/day): low (<0.8), medium (0.8–1.19), high (1.2–1.5), and very high (>1.5). Protein dose effect on CPAx was assessed at ICU discharge with analysis of covariance adjusting for age, illness severity, hospital length of stay before ICU admission, time to start nutrition support, and mechanical ventilation duration. We also investigated effect modification by energy intake and nutrition status.

Results

Enrolled patients (n = 531) were similar for age, nutrition status, and illness severity across groups. CPAxs were nonlinearly associated with protein doses and similar among low, medium, and very high groups. The CPAx for the high group was statistically different (P = 0.014), indicating that the data of three groups could be pooled. Mean CPAx difference remained statistically significant after adjusting for confounding variables (3.9 ± 1.8, P = 0.029 in the four-group model, and 2.7 ± 0.9, P = 0.003 in the pooled two-group model). Energy intake was equivalent between groups and did not modify CPAx. The high group had superior CPAx in both well-nourished and malnourished patients, indicating nutrition status was not an effect modifier.

Conclusion

Protein dose 1.2–1.5 g/kg/day was associated with superior functional capacity at ICU discharge compared with other doses. Neither energy intake nor nutrition status modified functional capacity across groups; therefore, the results appear to be influenced by 1.2–1.5 g/kg/day.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
8.80%
发文量
161
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (JPEN) is the premier scientific journal of nutrition and metabolic support. It publishes original peer-reviewed studies that define the cutting edge of basic and clinical research in the field. It explores the science of optimizing the care of patients receiving enteral or IV therapies. Also included: reviews, techniques, brief reports, case reports, and abstracts.
期刊最新文献
Comparison of taurolidine with 4% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid on antimicrobial lock effectiveness: An experimental study. Association between oral feeding versus enteral feeding and cerumen impaction in older hospitalized adults: A retrospective cohort study. Prognostic evaluation of nutrition risk screening tools in hospitalized adults with normal weight range, overweight, or obesity: A comparative analysis. Forty-seventh ASPEN Presidential Address: Parenteral nutrition compounding-Advancement or regression, where do we stand? Parenteral nutrition and bioelectrical impedance analysis estimated fat-free mass in adult patients with chronic intestinal failure: A descriptive cohort study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1