Maximizing Nutrition Support Practice and Measuring Adherence to Nutrition Support Guidelines in a Canadian Tertiary Care ICU
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: New comprehensive guidelines for nutrition support (NS) in the intensive care unit (ICU) can be used to improve quality of care and benchmark current practice. The objective of this study was to (a) compare NS practices in our medical/surgical ICU (MSICU) to 18 recommendations described in the Canadian Clinical Practice Guidelines and Society of Critical Care Medicine/American Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition guidelines, (b) determine the percentage of goal calories and protein delivered, and (c) identify the barriers to successful NS delivery. DESIGN: This was a prospective observation trial of up to 14 days duration. SETTING: A 24-bed MSICU in a tertiary teaching hospital in Toronto, Canada. PATIENTS: We studied 98 mechanically ventilated patients with any diagnosis who were expected to require either enteral nutrition (EN) or parenteral nutrition (PN) for >48 hours. MEASUREMENTS: We measured nutritional intake, barriers to nutritional intake, and parameters that allowed comparison of our practice to 18 guidelines. MAIN RESULTS: Mean delivery of protein and energy was 79.3% and 81.1% of goal, respectively. The average time to initiation of EN support was 29.5 ± 23.7 hours. The 3 main reasons for interruption to enteral feeding were airway management issues, procedures, and gastrointestinal intolerance. Enteral feeding during vasopressor therapy was well tolerated. Ten of the 18 guidelines were followed for ≥80% of the time. Protein goals for patients on renal replacement therapy and patients with liver disease were not reached. Head-of-bed positioning was also inadequate. The 13 patients requiring PN all had appropriate indications for this therapy, including gastrointestinal leaks, maldigestion, or malabsorption. CONCLUSIONS: Nutrition support delivery was successful for most patients in this study. However, only 10 of the 18 guidelines were adequately followed. This study helped identify NS practices that work well and others that require strategies for improvement.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".