Coltman Anne, Peterson Sarah, Roehl Kelly, Roosevelt Hannah, Sowa Diane
Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois
Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2015 Jan;39(1):28-33. doi: 10.1177/0148607114532135. Epub 2014 Apr 18.
Identifying patients at nutrition risk proves difficult in the intensive care unit (ICU) due to the nature of critical illness. No consensus exists on the most appropriate method to identify these patients. Traditional screens and assessments are often limited due to their subjective nature. The purpose of the quality improvement project was to compare proportions of ICU patients deemed at nutrition risk using 3 different tools.
A convenience sample of 294 patients admitted to the ICU was used. Patients were assessed using the institution's routine nutrition screening method, the Subjective Global Assessment (SGA), and the NUTrition Risk in Critically ill (NUTRIC) score. Information was collected on demographics, severity of illness, hospital and ICU length of stay (LOS), and disposition. Descriptive statistics were used to examine counts/proportions of risk categories; means ± SD were used to summarize demographic and clinical variables.
A total of 139 patients (47%) were deemed at nutrition risk or malnourished by at least 1 tool. Patients identified were older and had a lower body mass index, more weight loss, more fat and muscle wasting, more fluid accumulation, and lower average handgrips than those not at nutrition risk; they also had longer hospital and ICU LOS, higher rates of requiring further rehabilitation upon discharge, and higher mortality during hospitalization.
Traditional screening and assessment tools did not uniformly identify patients as malnourished or at nutrition risk in the ICU and therefore may be inappropriate for use in this population. Inclusion of physical assessment, functional status, and severity of illness may be useful in predicting nutrition risk in the ICU.
由于危重病的性质,在重症监护病房(ICU)中识别有营养风险的患者具有一定难度。对于识别这些患者的最合适方法尚无共识。传统的筛查和评估因其主观性往往存在局限性。本质量改进项目的目的是比较使用3种不同工具判定为有营养风险的ICU患者比例。
采用便利抽样法选取了294例入住ICU的患者。使用该机构的常规营养筛查方法、主观全面评定法(SGA)和危重症患者营养风险(NUTRIC)评分对患者进行评估。收集了患者的人口统计学信息、疾病严重程度、住院时间和ICU住院时间(LOS)以及出院情况。采用描述性统计分析风险类别计数/比例;采用均值±标准差总结人口统计学和临床变量。
共有139例患者(47%)被至少一种工具判定为有营养风险或营养不良。与无营养风险的患者相比,被识别出有营养风险的患者年龄更大,体重指数更低,体重减轻更多,脂肪和肌肉消耗更多,液体潴留更多,平均握力更低;他们的住院时间和ICU住院时间也更长,出院后需要进一步康复的比例更高,住院期间死亡率更高。
传统的筛查和评估工具并不能一致地识别出ICU中营养不良或有营养风险的患者,因此可能不适用于该人群。纳入体格检查、功能状态和疾病严重程度可能有助于预测ICU患者的营养风险。