Dataset Information

Actively implementing an evidence-based feeding guideline for critically ill patients (NEED): a multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Previous cluster-randomized controlled trials evaluating the impact of implementing evidence-based guidelines for nutrition therapy in critical illness do not consistently demonstrate patient benefits. A large-scale, sufficiently powered study is therefore warranted to ascertain the effects of guideline implementation on patient-centered outcomes.

Methods

We conducted a multicenter, cluster-randomized, parallel-controlled trial in intensive care units (ICUs) across China. We developed an evidence-based feeding guideline. ICUs randomly allocated to the guideline group formed a local "intervention team", which actively implemented the guideline using standardized educational materials, a graphical feeding protocol, and live online education outreach meetings conducted by members of the study management committee. ICUs assigned to the control group remained unaware of the guideline content. All ICUs enrolled patients who were expected to stay in the ICU longer than seven days. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 28 days of enrollment.

Results

Forty-eight ICUs were randomized to the guideline group and 49 to the control group. From March 2018 to July 2019, the guideline ICUs enrolled 1399 patients, and the control ICUs enrolled 1373 patients. Implementation of the guideline resulted in significantly earlier EN initiation (1.20 vs. 1.55 mean days to initiation of EN; difference - 0.40 [95% CI - 0.71 to - 0.09]; P = 0.01) and delayed PN initiation (1.29 vs. 0.80 mean days to start of PN; difference 1.06 [95% CI 0.44 to 1.67]; P = 0.001). There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality (14.2% vs. 15.2%; difference - 1.6% [95% CI - 4.3% to 1.2%]; P = 0.42) between groups.

Conclusions

In this large-scale, multicenter trial, active implementation of an evidence-based feeding guideline reduced the time to commencement of EN and overall PN use but did not translate to a reduction in mortality from critical illness.

Trial registration

ISRCTN, ISRCTN12233792 . Registered November 20th, 2017.

SUBMITTER: Ke L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8848648 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Actively implementing an evidence-based feeding guideline for critically ill patients (NEED): a multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled trial.

Ke Lu L Lin Jiajia J Doig Gordon S GS van Zanten Arthur R H ARH Wang Yang Y Xing Juan J Zhang Zhongheng Z Chen Tao T Zhou Lixin L Jiang Dongpo D Shi Qindong Q Lin Jiandong J Liu Jun J Cheng Aibin A Liang Yafeng Y Gao Peiyang P Sun Junli J Liu Wenming W Yang Zhenyu Z Zhang Rumin R Xing Wei W Zhang An A Zhou Zhigang Z Zhou Tingfa T Liu Yang Y Tong Fei F Wang Qiuhui Q Pan Aijun A Huang Xiaobo X Fan Chuming C Lu Weihua W Shi Dongwu D Wang Lei L Li Wei W Gu Liming L Xie Yingguang Y Sun Rongqing R Guo Feng F Han Lin L Zhou Lihua L Zheng Xiangde X Shan Feng F Liu Jianbo J Ai Yuhang Y Qu Yan Y Li Liandi L Li Hailing H Pan Zhiguo Z Xu Donglin D Zou Zhiqiang Z Gao Yan Y Yang Chunli C Kou Qiuye Q Zhang Xijing X Wu Jinglan J Qian Chuanyun C Zhang Weixing W Zhang Minjie M Zong Yuan Y Qin Bingyu B Zhang Fusen F Zhai Zhe Z Sun Yun Y Chang Ping P Yu Bo B Yu Min M Yuan Shiying S Deng Yijun Y Zhao Liyun L Zang Bin B Li Yuanfei Y Zhou Fachun F Chen Xiaomei X Shao Min M Wu Weidong W Wu Ming M Zhang Zhaohui Z Li Yimin Y Guo Qiang Q Wang Zhiyong Z Gong Yuanqi Y Song Yunlin Y Qian Kejian K Feng Yongjian Y Fu Baocai B Liu Xueyan X Li Zhiping Z Gong Chuanyong C Sun Cheng C Yu Jian J Tang Zhongzhi Z Huang Linxi L Ma Biao B He Zhijie Z Zhou Qingshan Q Yu Rongguo R Tong Zhihui Z Li Weiqin W

Critical care (London, England) 20220216 1

<h4>Background</h4>Previous cluster-randomized controlled trials evaluating the impact of implementing evidence-based guidelines for nutrition therapy in critical illness do not consistently demonstrate patient benefits. A large-scale, sufficiently powered study is therefore warranted to ascertain the effects of guideline implementation on patient-centered outcomes.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a multicenter, cluster-randomized, parallel-controlled trial in intensive care units (ICUs) across Chin ...[more]

PMID: 35172856

Similar Datasets

Project description:Tailoring interventions to address identified barriers to change may be an effective strategy to implement guidelines and improve practice. However, there is inadequate data to inform the optimal method or level of tailoring. Consequently, we conducted the PERFormance Enhancement of the Canadian nutrition guidelines by a Tailored Implementation Strategy (PERFECTIS) study to determine the feasibility of a multifaceted, interdisciplinary, tailored intervention aimed at improving adherence to critical care nutrition guidelines for the provision of enteral nutrition.A before-after study was conducted in seven ICUs from five hospitals in North America. During a 3-month pre-implementation phase, each ICU completed a nutrition practice audit to identify guideline-practice gaps and a barriers assessment to identify obstacles to practice change. During a one day meeting, the results of the audit and barriers assessment were reviewed and used to develop a site-specific tailored action plan. The tailored action plan was then implemented over a 12-month period that included bi-monthly progress meetings. Compliance with the tailored action plan was determined by the proportion of items in the action plan that was completely implemented. We examined acceptability of the intervention through staff responses to an evaluation questionnaire. In addition, the nutrition practice audit and barriers survey were repeated at the end of the implementation phase to determine changes in barriers and nutrition practices.All five sites successfully completed all aspects of the study. However, their ability to fully implement all of their developed action plans varied from 14% to 75% compliance. Nurses, on average, rated the study-related activities and resources as 'somewhat useful' and a third of respondents 'agreed' or 'strongly agreed' that their nutrition practice had changed as a result of the intervention. We observed a statistically significant 10% (Site range -4.3% to -26.0%) decrease in overall barriers score, and a non-significant 6% (Site range -1.5% to 17.9%) and 4% (-8.3% to 18.2%) increase in the adequacy of total nutrition from calories and protein, respectively.The multifaceted tailored intervention appears to be feasible but further refinement is warranted prior to testing the effectiveness of the approach on a larger scale.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01168128. Registered 21 July 2010.

Project description:BackgroundThis study aims to provide an updated assessment of the efficacy of optimized enteral nutrition (EN) delivery by implementing the volume-based feeding (VBF) protocol in critically ill patients.MethodsWe updated our previous literature retrieval with no language restrictions. The inclusion criteria were:1) Participants: Critically ill patients (Patients who was admitted in ICU; 2) Intervention: The VBF protocol was adopted for EN administration; 3) Comparison: The rate-based feeding (RBF) protocol was adopted for EN administration; 4) Major outcomes: EN nutrition delivery. The exclusion criteria included participants aged < 18 years, duplicated literature, animal and cellular experiments, and studies lacking any of the outcomes mentioned in the inclusion criteria. The databases included MEDLINE (through PubMed), Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System (SinoMed), Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure.ResultSixteen studies involving a total of 2896 critically ill patients are included in the updated meta-analysis. Compared with the previous meta-analysis, nine new studies were added that included 2205 more patients. The VBF protocol significantly improved energy (MD = 15.41%, 95% CI: [10.68, 20.14], p < 0.00001) and protein (MD = 22.05%, 95% CI: [10.89, 33.22], p = 0.0001) delivery. The patients in the VBF group stayed in the ICU for a shorter time (MD = 0.78, 95% CI: [0.01, 1.56], p = 0.05). The VBF protocol did not increase the risk of death (RR = 1.03, 95% CI: [0.85, 1.24], p = 0.76) or prolong the mechanical ventilation duration (MD = 0.81, 95% CI: [-0.30,1.92], p = 0.15). In addition, the VBF protocol did not affect EN complications, such as diarrhea (RR = 0.91, 95% CI: [0.73, 1.15], p = 0.43), emesis (RR = 1.23, 95% CI: [0.76, 1.99], p = 0.41), feeding intolerance (RR = 1.14, 95% CI: [0.63, 2.09], p = 0.66), and gastric retention (RR = 0.45, 95% CI: [0.16, 1.30], p = 0.14).ConclusionOur study revealed that the VBF protocol significantly improved calorie and protein delivery in critically ill patients with no additional risk.

Project description:Background: Liver injury commonly occurs in patients with COVID-19. There is limited data describing the course of liver injury occurrence in patients with different disease severity, and the causes and risk factors are unknown. We aim to investigate the incidence, characteristics, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of liver injury in patients with COVID-19. Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted in three hospitals (Zhejiang, China). From January 19, 2020 to February 20, 2020, patients confirmed with COVID-19 (≥18 years) and without liver injury were enrolled and divided into non-critically ill and critically ill groups. The incidence and characteristics of liver injury were compared between the two groups. Demographics, clinical characteristics, treatments, and treatment outcomes between patients with or without liver injury were compared within each group. The multivariable logistic regression model was used to explore the risk factors for liver injury. Results: The mean age of 131 enrolled patients was 51.2 years (standard deviation [SD]: 16.1 years), and 70 (53.4%) patients were male. A total of 76 patients developed liver injury (mild, 40.5%; moderate, 15.3%; severe, 2.3%) with a median occurrence time of 10.0 days. Critically ill patients had higher and earlier occurrence (81.5 vs. 51.9%, 12.0 vs. 5.0 days; p < 0.001), greater injury severity (p < 0.001), and slower recovery (50.0 vs. 61.1%) of liver function than non-critically ill patients. Multivariable regression showed that the number of concomitant medications (odds ratio [OR]: 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-1.21) and the combination treatment of lopinavir/ritonavir and arbidol (OR: 3.58, 95% CI: 1.44-9.52) were risk factors for liver injury in non-critically ill patients. The metabolism of arbidol can be significantly inhibited by lopinavir/ritonavir in vitro (p < 0.005), which may be the underlying cause of drug-related liver injury. Liver injury was related to increased length of hospital stay (mean difference [MD]: 3.2, 95% CI: 1.3-5.2) and viral shedding duration (MD: 3.0, 95% CI: 1.0-4.9). Conclusions: Critically ill patients with COVID-19 suffered earlier occurrence, greater injury severity, and slower recovery from liver injury than non-critically ill patients. Drug factors were related to liver injury in non-critically ill patients. Liver injury was related to prolonged hospital stay and viral shedding duration in patients with COVID-19. Clinical Trial Registration: World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ChiCTR2000030593. Registered March 8, 2020.

Dataset Information

Actively implementing an evidence-based feeding guideline for critically ill patients (NEED): a multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled trial.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Publications

Actively implementing an evidence-based feeding guideline for critically ill patients (NEED): a multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets