Evidence Hub

The impact of a tailored nutrition intervention delivered for the duration of hospitalisation on daily energy delivery for patients with critical illness (INTENT): a phase II randomised controlled trial

E. Ridley, Michael Bailey, M. Chapman, Lee-Anne S. Chapple, A. Deane, Marlene Gojanovic, Alisa M. Higgins, Carol L. Hodgson et al.

Critical Care, 2025

237 participants · 21 citations

Abstract

Nutrition interventions commenced in ICU and continued through to hospital discharge have not been definitively tested in critical care to date. To commence a program of research, we aimed to determine if a tailored nutrition intervention delivered for the duration of hospitalisation delivers more energy than usual care to patients initially admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). A multicentre, unblinded, parallel-group, phase II trial was conducted in twenty-two hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. Adult patients, requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) for 72–120 h within ICU, and receiving < 80% estimated energy requirements from enteral nutrition (EN) were included. The intervention (tailored nutrition) commenced in ICU and included EN and supplemental parenteral nutrition (PN), and EN, PN, and/or oral nutrition after liberation from MV, and was continued until hospital discharge or study day 28. The primary outcome was daily energy delivery from nutrition (kcal). Secondary outcomes included duration of hospital stay, ventilator free days at day 28 and total blood stream infection rate. The modified intention to treat analysis included 237 patients (n = 119 intervention and n = 118 usual care). Baseline characteristics were balanced; the median [interquartile range] intervention period was 19 [14–35] and 19 [13–32] days in the tailored nutrition and usual care groups respectively. Energy delivery was 1796 ± 31 kcal/day (tailored nutrition) versus 1482 ± 32…

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: 237 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