Nutrition therapy in the critical care setting: What is “best achievable” practice? An international multicenter observational study*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe current nutrition practices in intensive care units and determine "best achievable" practice relative to evidence-based Critical Care Nutrition Clinical Practice Guidelines. DESIGN: An international, prospective, observational, cohort study conducted January to June 2007. SETTING: One hundred fifty-eight adult intensive care units from 20 countries. PATIENTS: Two-thousand nine-hundred forty-six consecutively enrolled mechanically ventilated adult patients (mean, 18.6 per site) who stayed in the intensive care unit for at least 72 hrs. INTERVENTIONS: Data on nutrition practices were collected from intensive care unit admission to intensive care unit discharge or a maximum of 12 days. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Relative to recommendations of the Clinical Practice Guidelines, we report average, best, and worst site performance on key nutrition practices. Adherence to Clinical Practice Guideline recommendations was high for some recommendations: use of enteral nutrition in preference to parenteral nutrition, glycemic control, lack of utilization of arginine-enriched enteral formulas, delivery of hypocaloric parenteral nutrition, and the presence of a feeding protocol. However, significant practice gaps were identified for other recommendations. Average time to start of enteral nutrition was 46.5 hrs (site average range, 8.2-149.1 hrs). The average use of motility agents and small bowel feeding in patients who had high gastric residual volumes was 58.7% (site average range, 0%-100%) and 14.7% (site average range, 0%-100%), respectively. There was poor adherence to recommendations for the use of enteral formulas enriched with fish oils, glutamine supplementation, timing of supplemental parenteral nutrition, and avoidance of soybean oil-based parenteral lipids. Average nutritional adequacy was 59% (site average range, 20.5%-94.4%) for energy and 60.3% (site average range, 18.6%-152.5%) for protein. CONCLUSIONS: Despite high adherence to some recommendations, large gaps exist between many recommendations and actual practice in intensive care units, and consequently nutrition therapy is suboptimal. We have identified "best achievable" practice that can serve as targets for future quality improvement initiatives.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".