de Luis D A, Cabezas G, Izaola O, Aller R, Cuellar L, Terroba M C
Instituto de Endocrinología y Nutrición, Facultad de Medicina, Unidad de Investigación, Hospital Rio Hortega, Universidad de Valladolid, C/Los Perales 16, 47130 Simancas, Valladolid.
An Med Interna. 2007 Jan;24(1):15-8. doi: 10.4321/s0212-71992007000100004.
Although liquid supplements are formulated to provide extra energy, minerals, vitamins and proteins, much of the success of supplementation depends upon the acceptability of the product and the ability of the patients to take large volumes over a period of time.
This study was set up to evaluate the acceptability by haematological cancer patients of 3 commercially available nutritional supplements.
A population of 32 haematological cancer patients with reduced food intakes (less than 50% of calorie requirements by Harrist Benedict formula) was enrolled. Supplements were randomly assigned to each patient. Patients could try the drinks over 2 days period. They were asked to rate the acceptability of supplement, rating the product with a visual scale from 1 to 5 points with five parameters (color, taste, smell, texture, and temperature).
Ten patients received first ONS (oral nutritional supplements), 12 second ONS, and 10 third ONS. No epidemiological differences were detected among three groups. Total calorie and macronutrient consumption improved with all supplements. Average values of color, taste, smell, temperature and texture were similar on three oral nutritional supplements (ONS). Analogic scale was analyze in a categoric way with frequencies, too. Frequencies of 1 and 2 points (very good and good responses) with taste were better with second ONS (85%; p < 0.05) than first ONS (50%) and third ONS (55.5%). Frequencies with smell were better with second ONS (83.3%; p < 0.05) than first (55.5%) and third ONS (62.5%). Frequencies with texture were higher in first ONS (90%; p < 0.05) and second ONS (100%; p < 0.05) than third ONS (66.7%). Temperature and color frequencies were similar in all ONS.
Oral nutritional supplements had different acceptability in haematological cancer patients. Taste, smell and texture could be better in some ONS in these patients.
尽管液体补充剂旨在提供额外的能量、矿物质、维生素和蛋白质,但补充剂的成功很大程度上取决于产品的可接受性以及患者在一段时间内大量服用的能力。
本研究旨在评估血液系统癌症患者对三种市售营养补充剂的可接受性。
招募了32名食物摄入量减少(根据哈里斯·本尼迪克特公式,低于热量需求的50%)的血液系统癌症患者。将补充剂随机分配给每位患者。患者可在两天内试用这些饮品。要求他们根据颜色、味道、气味、质地和温度这五个参数,用1至5分的视觉量表对补充剂的可接受性进行评分。
10名患者接受了第一种口服营养补充剂(ONS),12名接受了第二种ONS,10名接受了第三种ONS。三组之间未检测到流行病学差异。所有补充剂均使总热量和大量营养素的摄入量有所改善。三种口服营养补充剂(ONS)在颜色、味道、气味、温度和质地上的平均值相似。类比量表也按频率进行了分类分析。第二种ONS在味道方面获得1分和2分(非常好和良好反应)的频率(85%;p<0.05)高于第一种ONS(50%)和第三种ONS(55.5%)。第二种ONS在气味方面的频率(83.3%;p<0.05)高于第一种(55.5%)和第三种ONS(62.5%)。第一种ONS(90%;p<0.05)和第二种ONS(100%;p<0.05)在质地上的频率高于第三种ONS(66.7%)。所有ONS在温度和颜色方面的频率相似。
口服营养补充剂在血液系统癌症患者中的可接受性存在差异。在这些患者中,某些ONS在味道、气味和质地上可能更好。