Factors associated with delayed enteral nutrition in the intensive care unit: a propensity score–matched retrospective cohort study
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, ISSN: 0002-9165, Vol: 114, Issue: 1, Page: 295-302
2021
- 7Citations
- 37Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations7
- Citation Indexes7
- CrossRef4
- Captures37
- Readers37
- 37
Article Description
Guidelines recommend enteral nutrition (EN) within 48 h of admission to the medical intensive care unit (ICU) in appropriate patients. However, delayed EN is still common. This study sought to identify risk factors for delayed EN ordering in the ICU and to examine its association with patient outcomes. This was a retrospective study from 2010–2018. Adult patients were included if they were admitted to the medical ICU for >48 h, were appropriate for EN, and had an order for EN placed within 30 d of admission. The primary outcome was ordering of EN, classified as early if ordered within 48 h of ICU admission and otherwise as delayed. Propensity score matching was used to examine the relation between delayed EN and ICU-free days, and outcomes such as length of ICU admission, length of hospitalization during 30 d of follow-up, and mortality. A total of 738 (79%) patients received early EN and 196 (21%) received delayed EN. The exposures most strongly associated with delayed EN were order placement by a Doctor of Medicine compared with a dietitian [adjusted OR (aOR): 2.58; 95% CI: 1.57, 4.24] and use of vasopressors within 48 h of ICU admission (aOR: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.22, 2.59). After propensity score matching to balance baseline characteristics, delayed EN ordering was significantly associated with fewer ICU-free days, longer ICU admissions, and longer hospitalizations, but not mortality, compared with early EN. Provider-level factors were associated with delayed ordering of EN which itself was associated with worse outcomes. Interventions directed at providers may increase timely EN in the ICU and improve outcomes.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000291652200329X; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqab023; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85110587013&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33826689; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S000291652200329X; https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqab023
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know