Evidence Hub

Controlled enteral nutrition in critical care patients - A randomized clinical trial of a novel management system

I. Kagan, Moran Hellerman-Itzhaki, I. Bendavid, Liran Statlender, G. Fishman, P. Wischmeyer, E. de Waele, P. Singer

Clinical Nutrition, 2023

100 participants · 26 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE

Nutritional therapy is essential to ICU care. Successful early enteral feeding is hindered by lack of protocols, gastrointestinal intolerance and feeding interruptions, leading to impaired nutritional intake. smART+ was developed as a nutrition management feeding platform controlling tube positioning, reflux, gastric pressure, and malnutrition. This study evaluated the potential of this new ICU care platform to deliver targeted nutrition and improve ICU outcomes.

METHODS

Critically ill patients ≥18 years-old, mechanically ventilated and enterally fed, were randomized to receive ESPEN-guideline-based nutrition or smART+ -guided nutrition for 2-14 days. Primary endpoint was average deviation from daily targeted nutrition determined via calculation of energy targets per calorimetry. Secondary endpoints included gastric residual volumes, length of stay (LOS) and length of ventilation (LOV).

RESULTS

smART+ achieved a mean deviation from daily targeted nutrition of 10.5% (n = 48) versus 34.3% for control (n = 50), p < 0.0001. LOS and LOV were decreased in the smART+ group versus control (mean LOS: 10.4 days versus 13.7; reduction 3.3 days, adjusted HR 1.71, 95% CI:1.13,2.60, p = 0.012; mean LOV: 9.5 days versus 12.8 days reduction of 3.3 days, adjusted HR 1.64, 95% CI:1.08-2.51, p = 0.021). Feeding goals were met (within ±10%) on 75.7% of days for smART+ versus 23.3% for control (p < 0.001). No treatment-related adverse events occurred in either group. The study was…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 100 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free