Protein prescription and delivery practices in critically ill adults: A survey of Australian and New Zealand intensive care dietitians.

BACKGROUND: Protein provision is thought to be integral to attenuating muscle wasting in critical illness, yet patients receive half of that prescribed. As international guidelines lack definitive evidence to support recommendations, understanding clinicians' views relating to protein practices is of importance. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to describe Australia and New Zealand intensive care unit (ICU) dietitians' protein prescription and perceived delivery practices in critically ill adults, including common barriers and associations between ICU clinical experience and protein prescriptions for different clinical conditions. METHODS: A 42-item descriptive quantitative survey of Australian and New Zealand intensive care dietitians was disseminated through nutrition and ICU society e-mailing lists. Data were collected on respondent demographics and reported protein practices including questions related to a multitrauma case study. Data were analysed using descriptive and content analysis and reported as n (%). Fisher's exact tests were used to compare experience and protein prescriptions. RESULTS: Of the 67 responses received (one excluded due to >50% missing data), more than 80% of respondents stated they would prescribe 1.2-1.5 g protein/kg bodyweight/day for most critically ill patients, most commonly using European Society of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) guidelines to support prescriptions (n = 61/66, 92%). Most respondents (n = 49/66, 74%) thought their practice achieved 61-80% of protein prescriptions, with frequently reported barriers including fasting periods (n = 59/66, 89%), avoiding energy overfeeding (n = 50/66, 76%), and gastrointestinal intolerance (n = 47/66, 71%). No associations between years of ICU experience and protein prescriptions for 14 of the 15 predefined clinical conditions were present. CONCLUSIONS: Australian and New Zealand ICU dietitians use international guidelines to inform protein prescriptions of 1.2-1.5 g/kg/day for most clinical conditions, and protein prescriptions do not appear to be influenced by years of ICU experience. Key perceived barriers to protein delivery including avoidance of energy overfeeding and gastrointestinal intolerance could be explored to improve protein adequacy.

Measuring nutrition-related outcomes in a cohort of multi-trauma patients following intensive care unit discharge.

BACKGROUND: Functional recovery is an important outcome for those who survive critical illness. The present study aimed to assess nutrition provision and nutrition-related outcomes in a multi-trauma cohort following intensive care unit (ICU) discharge. METHODS: The present study investigated a prospective cohort of patients discharged from an ICU, who had been admitted because of major trauma and required mechanical ventilation for at least 48 h. Nutrition-related outcomes, including body weight, quadriceps muscle layer thickness (QMLT), handgrip strength and subjective global assessment, were recorded on ICU discharge, days 5-7 post-ICU discharge and then weekly until hospital discharge. Nutrition intake was recorded for 5 days post-ICU discharge. Unless otherwise stated, data are presented as the mean (SD). RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients [75% males, 55 (22.5) years] were included. Intake met 64% (28%) of estimated energy and 72% (32%) of protein requirements over the 5 days post-ICU discharge, which was similar to over the ICU admission. From ICU admission to hospital discharge, the mean reduction in weight was 4.2 kg (95% confidence interval = 2.2-6.3, P < 0.001) and after ICU discharge, the mean reduction in weight and QMLT was 2.6 kg (95% confidence interval = 1.0-4.2, P = 0.004) and 0.23 cm (95% confidence interval = 0.06-0.4, P = 0.01), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients received less energy and protein than estimated requirements after ICU discharge. Weight loss and reduction in QMLT also occurred during this period.

Associations between nutritional energy delivery, bioimpedance spectroscopy and functional outcomes in survivors of critical illness.

BACKGROUND: Patients who survive critical illness frequently develop muscle weakness that can impact on quality of life; nutrition is potentially a modifiable risk factor. The present study aimed to explore the associations between cumulative energy deficits (using indirect calorimetry and estimated requirements), nutritional and functional outcomes. METHODS: A prospective single-centre observational study of 60 intensive care unit (ICU) patients, who were mechanically ventilated for at least 48 h, was conducted. Cumulative energy deficit was determined from artificial nutrition delivery compared to targets. Measurements included: (i) at recruitment and ICU discharge, weight, fat-free mass (bioimpedance spectroscopy) and malnutrition (Subjective Global Assessment score B/C); (ii) at awakening and ICU discharge, physical function (Physical Function in Intensive Care Test-scored) and muscle strength (Medical Research Council sum-score (MRC-SS). ICU-acquired weakness was defined as a MRC-SS score of less than 48/60. RESULTS: The median (interquartile range) cumulative energy deficit compared to the estimated targets up to ICU day 12 was 3648 (2514-5650) kcal. Adjusting for body mass index, age and severity of illness, cumulative energy deficit (per 1000 kcal) was independently associated with greater odds of ICU-acquired weakness [odds ratio (OR) = 2.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.4-3.3, P = 0.001] and malnutrition (OR = 1.9, 95% CI = 1.1-3.2, P = 0.02). In similar multivariable linear models, cumulative energy deficit was associated with reductions in fat-free mass (-1.3 kg; 95% CI = -2.4 to -0.2, P = 0.02) and physical function scores (-0.6 points; 95% CI = -0.9 to -0.3, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cumulative energy deficit from artificial nutrition support was associated with reduced functional outcomes and greater loss of fat-free mass in ventilated ICU patients.

Nutrition Intervention Informed by Indirect Calorimetry Compared to Predictive Equations to Achieve Weight Goals in Geriatric Rehabilitation Inpatients: The NEED Study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess if nutritional interventions informed by indirect calorimetry (IC), compared to predictive equations, show greater improvements in achieving weight goals, muscle mass, strength, physical and functional performance. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Geriatric rehabilitation inpatients referred to dietitian. INTERVENTION AND MEASUREMENTS: Patients were allocated based on admission ward to either the IC or equation (EQ) group. Measured resting metabolic rate (RMR) by IC was communicated to the treating dietitian for the IC group but concealed for the EQ group. Achieving weight goals was determined by comparing individualised weight goals with weight changes from inclusion to discharge (weight gain/loss: >2% change, maintenance: ≤2%). Muscle mass, strength, physical and functional performance were assessed at admission and discharge. Food intake was assessed twice over three-days at inclusion and before discharge using plate waste observation. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were included (IC n=22; EQ n=31; age: 84.3±8.4 years). The measured RMR was lower than the estimated RMR within both groups [mean difference IC -282 (95%CI -490;-203), EQ -273 (-381;-42) kcal/day)] and comparable between-groups (median IC 1271 [interquartile range 1111;1446] versus EQ 1302 [1135;1397] kcal/day, p=0.800). Energy targets in the IC group were lower than the EQ group [mean difference -317 (95%CI -479;-155) kcal/day]. There were no between-group differences in energy intake, achieving weight goals, changes in muscle mass, strength, physical and functional performance. CONCLUSIONS: In geriatric rehabilitation inpatients, nutritional interventions informed by IC compared to predictive equations showed no greater improvement in achieving weight goals, muscle mass, strength, physical and functional performance. IC facilitates more accurate determination of energy targets in this population. However, evidence for the potential benefits of its use in nutrition interventions was limited by a lack of agreement between patients' energy intake and energy targets.

Screening, Diagnosis and Management of Sarcopenia and Frailty in Hospitalized Older Adults: Recommendations from the Australian and New Zealand Society for Sarcopenia and Frailty Research (ANZSSFR) Expert Working Group.

Sarcopenia and frailty are highly prevalent conditions in older hospitalized patients, which are associated with a myriad of adverse clinical outcomes. This paper, prepared by a multidisciplinary expert working group from the Australian and New Zealand Society for Sarcopenia and Frailty Research (ANZSSFR), provides an up-to-date overview of current evidence and recommendations based on a narrative review of the literature for the screening, diagnosis, and management of sarcopenia and frailty in older patients within the hospital setting. It also includes suggestions on potential pathways to implement change to encourage widespread adoption of these evidence-informed recommendations within hospital settings. The expert working group concluded there was insufficient evidence to support any specific screening tool for sarcopenia and recommends an assessment of probable sarcopenia/sarcopenia using established criteria for all older (≥65 years) hospitalized patients or in younger patients with conditions (e.g., comorbidities) that may increase their risk of sarcopenia. Diagnosis of probable sarcopenia should be based on an assessment of low muscle strength (grip strength or five times sit-to-stand) with sarcopenia diagnosis including low muscle mass quantified from dual energy X-ray absorptiometry, bioelectrical impedance analysis or in the absence of diagnostic devices, calf circumference as a proxy measure. Severe sarcopenia is represented by the addition of impaired physical performance (slow gait speed). All patients with probable sarcopenia or sarcopenia should be investigated for causes (e.g., chronic/acute disease or malnutrition), and treated accordingly. For frailty, it is recommended that all hospitalized patients aged 70 years and older be screened using a validated tool [Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), Hospital Frailty Risk Score, the FRAIL scale or the Frailty Index]. Patients screened as positive for frailty should undergo further clinical assessment using the Frailty Phenotype, Frailty Index or information collected from a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA). All patients identified as frail should receive follow up by a health practitioner(s) for an individualized care plan. To treat older hospitalized patients with probable sarcopenia, sarcopenia, or frailty, it is recommended that a structured and supervised multi-component exercise program incorporating elements of resistance (muscle strengthening), challenging balance, and functional mobility training be prescribed as early as possible combined with nutritional support to optimize energy and protein intake and correct any deficiencies. There is insufficient evidence to recommend pharmacological agents for the treatment of sarcopenia or frailty. Finally, to facilitate integration of these recommendations into hospital settings organization-wide approaches are needed, with the Spread and Sustain framework recommended to facilitate organizational culture change, with the help of 'champions' to drive these changes. A multidisciplinary team approach incorporating awareness and education initiatives for healthcare professionals is recommended to ensure that screening, diagnosis and management approaches for sarcopenia and frailty are embedded and sustained within hospital settings. Finally, patients and caregivers' education should be integrated into the care pathway to facilitate adherence to prescribed management approaches for sarcopenia and frailty.