Evidence Hub

Postoperative Dietary Intake Achievement: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Chi-Ou-Yi Ho, Z. Ibrahim, Zalina Abu Zaid, Z. M. Mat Daud, Nor Baizura Mohd Yusop, M. N. Mohd Abas, J. Omar

Nutrients, 2022

118 participants · 13 citations

Abstract

Sufficient postoperative dietary intake is crucial for ensuring a better surgical outcome. This study aimed to investigate the postoperative dietary intake achievement and predictors of postoperative dietary intake among gynecologic cancer patients. A total of 118 participants were included in this secondary analysis. Postoperative dietary data was pooled and re-classified into early postoperative dietary intake achievement (EDIA) (daily energy intake (DEI) ≥ 75% from the estimated energy requirement (EER)) and delay dietary intake achievement (DDIA) (DEI < 75% EER) There was a significant difference in postoperative changes in weight (p = 0.002), muscle mass (p = 0.018), and handgrip strength (p = 0.010) between the groups. Postoperative daily energy and protein intake in the EDIA was significantly greater than DDIA from operation day to discharged (p = 0.000 and p = 0.036). Four significant independent postoperative dietary intake predictors were found: preoperative whey protein-infused carbohydrate loading (p = 0.000), postoperative nausea vomiting (p = 0.001), age (p = 0.010), and time to tolerate clear fluid (p = 0.016). The multilinear regression model significantly predicted postoperative dietary intake, F (4, 116) = 68.013, p = 0.000, adj. R2 = 0.698. With the four predictors’ recognition, the integration of a more specific and comprehensive dietitian-led supportive care with individualized nutrition intervention ought to be considered to promote functional recovery.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 118 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