Efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions to treat malnutrition in older persons: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The SENATOR project ONTOP series and MaNuEL knowledge hub project.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to perform a review of SRs of non-pharmacological interventions in older patients with well-defined malnutrition using relevant outcomes agreed by a broad panel of experts. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, and CINHAL databases were searched for SRs. Primary studies from those SRs were included. Quality assessment was undertaken using Cochrane and GRADE criteria. RESULTS: Eighteen primary studies from seventeen SRs were included. Eleven RCTs compared oral nutritional supplementation (ONS) with usual care. No beneficial effects of ONS treatment, after performing two meta-analysis in body weight changes (six studies), mean difference: 0.59 (95%CI -0.08, 1.96) kg, and in body mass index changes (two studies), mean difference: 0.31 (95%CI -0.17, 0.79) kg/m2 were found. Neither in MNA scores, muscle strength, activities of daily living, timed Up&Go, quality of life and mortality. Results of other intervention studies (dietary counselling and ONS, ONS combined with exercise, nutrition delivery systems) were inconsistent. The overall quality of the evidence was very low due to risk of bias and small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: This review has highlighted the lack of high quality evidence to indicate which interventions are effective in treating malnutrition in older people. High quality research studies are urgently needed in this area.

Protein Provision in Critically Ill Adults Requiring Enteral Nutrition: Are Guidelines Being Met?

BACKGROUND: In a previous audit, 81% of enteral protein prescriptions failed to meet protein guidelines. To address this, a very high-protein enteral formula and protein supplements were introduced, and protein prescriptions were adjusted to account for nonnutrition energy sources displacing enteral formula. This follow-up audit compared protein provision in critically ill adults requiring exclusive enteral nutrition (EN), first, with local and international guidelines, and second, after changes to practice, with the previous audit in the same intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: Data were collected from 106 adults consecutively admitted to the ICU of a U.K. tertiary hospital and requiring exclusive EN ≥3 days. Protein targets based on local guidelines (1.25, 1.5, or 2.0 g/kg/d), nutrition prescription, and delivery were recorded for 24 hours between days 1-3, 5-7, 8-10, and 18-20 post-ICU admission. RESULTS: The proportion of day 1-3 protein prescriptions meeting protein targets increased from 19% in 2015 to 69% in 2017 (P < .0005, φ = 0.50). The median percentage of protein target delivered was lower than prescribed (79% vs 103%; (P < .0005; r = 0.53) and EN delivery only met the target of 22% of patients. The proportion of protein prescriptions meeting protein targets was similar for days 1-3 (69%), 5-7 (71%), and 8-10 (68%), but increased slightly by days 18-20 (74%). The proportion of patients for which EN delivery met protein targets increased with the number of days post-ICU admission (22%, 26%, 37%, and 53% for days 1-3, 5-7, 8-10, and 18-20, respectively). CONCLUSION: The proportion of protein prescriptions meeting guideline targets was higher after changes to practice.