Suppr超能文献

高卡路里的复食方案不会增加成年进食障碍患者的不良结局。

A Higher-Calorie Refeeding Protocol Does Not Increase Adverse Outcomes in Adult Patients with Eating Disorders.

出版信息

J Acad Nutr Diet. 2018 Aug;118(8):1450-1463. doi: 10.1016/j.jand.2018.01.023. Epub 2018 Apr 12.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patients with eating disorders (EDs) are often considered a high-risk population to refeed. Current research advises using "start low, go slow" refeeding methods (∼1,000 kcal/day, advancing ∼500 kcal/day every 3 to 4 days) in adult patients with severe EDs to prevent the development of refeeding syndrome (RFS), typically characterized by decreases in serum electrolyte levels and fluid shifts.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the incidence of RFS and related outcomes using a low-calorie protocol (LC) (1,000 kcal) or a higher-calorie protocol (HC) (1,500 kcal) in medically compromised adult patients with EDs.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective pre-test-post-test study.

PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: One hundred and nineteen participants with EDs, medically admitted to a tertiary hospital in Brisbane, Australia, between December 2010 and January 2017, were included (LC: n=26, HC: n=93). The HC refeeding protocol was implemented in September 2013.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Differences in prevalence of electrolyte disturbances, hypoglycemia, edema, and RFS diagnoses were examined.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS PERFORMED

χ tests, Kruskal-Wallis H test, analysis of variance, and independent t tests were used to compare data between the two protocols.

RESULTS

Descriptors were similar between groups (LC: 28±9 years, 96% female, 85% with anorexia nervosa, 31% admitted primarily because of clinical symptoms of exacerbated ED vs HC: 27±9 years, 97% female, 84% with anorexia nervosa, 44% admitted primarily because of clinical symptoms of exacerbated ED, P>0.05). Participants refed using the LC protocol had higher incidence rates of hypoglycemia (LC: 31% vs HC: 10%, P=0.012), with no statistical or clinical differences in electrolyte disturbances (LC: 65% vs HC: 45%, P=0.079), edema (LC: 8% vs HC: 6%, P=0.722) or diagnosed RFS (LC: 4% vs HC: 1%, P=0.391).

CONCLUSIONS

A higher-calorie refeeding protocol appears to be safe, with no differences in rates of electrolyte disturbances or clinically diagnosed RFS and a lower incidence of hypoglycemia. Future research examining higher-calorie intakes, similar to those studied in adolescent patients, may be beneficial.

摘要

背景

患有进食障碍(ED)的患者通常被认为是重新进食的高危人群。目前的研究建议在患有严重 ED 的成年患者中使用“低进量,慢增速”的喂养方法(每天约 1000 卡路里,每 3 至 4 天增加约 500 卡路里),以预防再喂养综合征(RFS)的发生,RFS 的典型特征是血清电解质水平降低和液体转移。

目的

比较使用低热量方案(LC)(1000 卡路里)或高热量方案(HC)(1500 卡路里)在患有 ED 的医学上有并发症的成年患者中 RFS 的发生率和相关结果。

设计

这是一项回顾性的预测试后测试研究。

参与者/设置:2010 年 12 月至 2017 年 1 月期间,119 名患有 ED 的患者被收入澳大利亚布里斯班的一家三级医院进行医学治疗,其中包括 26 名 LC 组和 93 名 HC 组。HC 喂养方案于 2013 年 9 月实施。

主要观察指标

比较两种方案之间电解质紊乱、低血糖、水肿和 RFS 诊断的发生率差异。

统计分析

使用 χ 检验、Kruskal-Wallis H 检验、方差分析和独立 t 检验比较两种方案的数据。

结果

两组的描述符相似(LC:28±9 岁,96%为女性,85%为神经性厌食症,31%因 ED 临床症状加重入院;HC:27±9 岁,97%为女性,84%为神经性厌食症,44%因 ED 临床症状加重入院,P>0.05)。使用 LC 方案进行喂养的患者低血糖发生率更高(LC:31% vs HC:10%,P=0.012),电解质紊乱(LC:65% vs HC:45%,P=0.079)、水肿(LC:8% vs HC:6%,P=0.722)或诊断为 RFS(LC:4% vs HC:1%,P=0.391)的发生率没有统计学或临床差异。

结论

高热量喂养方案似乎是安全的,没有电解质紊乱或临床诊断的 RFS 发生率差异,低血糖发生率更低。未来研究可以考虑更高的热量摄入,类似于对青少年患者的研究,可能会有所帮助。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验