Nutrition guidelines for critically ill adults admitted with COVID-19: Is there consensus?
TL;DR: In this paper, a literature review was conducted to identify guidelines affiliated with or endorsed by international nutrition societies or dietetic associations which included recommendations for the nutritional management of critically ill adult patients with COVID-19.
Abstract: Summary Introduction The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has overwhelmed hospital systems globally, resulting in less experienced staff caring for critically ill patients within the intensive care unit (ICU). Many guidelines have been developed to guide nutrition care. Aim To identify key guidelines or practice recommendations for nutrition support practices in critically ill adults admitted with COVID-19, to describe similarities and differences between recommendations, and to discuss implications for clinical practice. Methods A literature review was conducted to identify guidelines affiliated with or endorsed by international nutrition societies or dietetic associations which included recommendations for the nutritional management of critically ill adult patients with COVID-19. Data were extracted on pre-defined key aspects of nutritional care including nutrition prescription, delivery, monitoring and workforce recommendations, and key similarities and discrepancies, as well as implications for clinical practice were summarized. Results Ten clinical practice guidelines were identified. Similar recommendations included: the use of high protein, volume restricted enteral formula delivered gastrically and commenced early in ICU and introduced gradually, while taking into consideration non-nutritional calories to avoid overfeeding. Specific advice for patients in the prone position was common, and non-intubated patients were highlighted as a population at high nutritional risk. Major discrepancies included the use of indirect calorimetry to guide energy targets and advice around using gastric residual volumes (GRVs) to monitor feeding tolerance. Conclusion Overall, common recommendations around formula type and route of feeding exist, with major discrepancies being around the use of indirect calorimetry and GRVs, which reflect international ICU nutrition guidelines.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors present a review of nutrition recommendations regarding COVID-19 pandemic and serve as a reference guide for health professionals, focusing on the role of hydration and the adoption of a healthy diet during quarantine.
Abstract: Medical nutrition therapy may have a key role in the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the spread of misinformation, the present review organizes and summarizes nutrition recommendations regarding COVID-19, serving as a reference guide for health professionals. Nineteen official recommendations were included of international, US, Asian, European, Canadian, and Australian origin on (i) lactation, (ii) nutrition during quarantine, (iii) nutrition in high-risk groups, (iv) nutrition for recovery at home, and (v) nutrition in hospital. Breastfeeding is encouraged, and the role of hydration and the adoption of a healthy diet during quarantine are emphasized. Older people and/or people with comorbidities should be checked for malnutrition and follow a healthy diet. For patients recovering at home, hydration, protein, and energy intake should be ensured. For hospitalized patients, early feeding with a priority on enteral route is recommended.
9 citations
TL;DR: In this article , the authors performed a nationwide observational cohort study using a nationwide administrative-financial database (Premier) in United States and found that early enteral nutrition (early EN) is associated with earlier liberation from mechanical ventilation, shorter ICU and hospital length of stays (LOS) and decreased cost.
Abstract: OBJECTIVES: Current guidance recommends initiation of early enteral nutrition (early EN) within 24–36 hours of ICU admission in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Despite this recommendation, there is quite limited evidence describing the effect of early EN on outcomes in COVID-19 patients. The association between early EN (within 3 d post intubation) and clinical outcomes in adult COVID-19 patients requiring mechanical ventilation (within 2 d post ICU admission) was evaluated. DESIGN: We performed a nationwide observational cohort study using a nationwide administrative-financial database (Premier) in United States. SETTING: Information pertaining to all COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU from 75 hospitals between April and December 2020 was analyzed. PATIENTS: A total of 861 COVID-19 patients were included. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Clinical outcomes were assessed via regression models to control for patient and hospital characteristics. We identified 513 COVID-19 ICU patients (59.2%) requiring mechanical ventilation who received early EN and had similar baseline characteristics to late EN group. Compared with late EN group, the early EN group had shorter ICU (hazard ratio [HR], 1.39; 95% CI, 1.15–1.68) and hospital length of stays (LOS) (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.23–1.91), fewer mechanical ventilation days (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01–1.54), and lower cost (–$22,443; 95% CI, –$32,342 to –$12,534). All comparisons were statistically significant (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation, early EN is associated with earlier liberation from mechanical ventilation, shorter ICU and hospital LOS, and decreased cost. Our results are among the first to support guideline recommendations for initiation of early EN in COVID-19 ICU patients. Further, our data show nearly 40% of critically ill COVID-19 patients fail to have early EN initiated, even at 3 d post initiation of mechanical ventilation. These results emphasize the need for targeted strategies promoting initiation of early EN, as this may lead to improved clinical and economic outcomes in severe COVID-19 patients.
6 citations
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors explored which method best agrees with lean body mass as measured by bioelectric impedance (LBMBIA) in this population and concluded that using a method that overestimates LBM in all categories may be the only way to minimise underdosing of nutritional protein.
Abstract: A large proportion of hospitalised COVID-19 patients are overweight. There is no consensus in the literature on how lean body mass (LBM) can best be estimated to adequately guide nutritional protein recommendations in hospitalised patients who are not at an ideal weight. We aim to explore which method best agrees with lean body mass as measured by bioelectric impedance (LBMBIA) in this population.LBM was calculated by five commonly used methods for 150 hospitalised COVID-19 patients previously included in the BIAC-19 study; total body weight, regression to a BMI of 22.5, regression to BMI 27.5 when BMI>30, and the equations described by Gallagher and the ESPEN ICU guideline. Error-standard plots were used to assess agreement and bias compared to LBMBIA. The actual protein provided to ICU patients during their stay was compared to targets set using LBMBIA and LBM calculated by other methods.All methods to calculate LBM suffered from overestimation, underestimation, fixed- and proportional bias and wide limits of agreement compared to LBMBIA. Bias was inconsistent across sex and BMI subgroups. Twenty-eight ICU patients received a mean of 51.19 (95%-BCa CI 37.1;64.1) grams of protein daily, accumulating to a mean of 61.6% (95%-BCa CI 43.2;80.8) of TargetBIA during their ICU stay. The percentage received of the target as calculated by the LBMGallagher method for males was the only one to not differ significantly from the percentage received of TargetBIA (mean difference 1.4% (95%-BCa CI -1.3;4.6) p = 1.0).We could not identify a mathematical method for calculating LBM that had an acceptable agreement with LBM as derived from BIA for males and females across all BMI subgroups in our hospitalised COVID-19 population. Consequently, discrepancies when assessing the adequacy of protein provision in ICU patients were found. We strongly advise using baseline LBMBIA to guide protein dosing if possible. In the absence of BIA, using a method that overestimates LBM in all categories may be the only way to minimise underdosing of nutritional protein.The protocol of the BIAC-19 study, of which this is a post-hoc sub-analysis, is registered in the Netherlands Trial Register (number NL8562).
5 citations
TL;DR: The quality of energy expenditure determination recommendations is low and nutrition CPGs for critically ill patients are developed using systematic methods but lack engagement with key stakeholders and guidance to support application.
Abstract: Background: To evaluate the methodological quality of (1) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) that inform nutrition care in critically ill adults using the AGREE II tool and (2) CPG recommendations for determining energy expenditure using the AGREE-REX tool. Methods: CPGs by a professional society or academic group, intended to guide nutrition care in critically ill adults, that used a systematic literature search and rated the evidence were included. Four databases and grey literature were searched from January 2011 to 19 January 2022. Five investigators assessed the methodological quality of CPGs and recommendations specific to energy expenditure determination. Scaled domain scores were calculated for AGREE II and a scaled total score for AGREE-REX. Data are presented as medians (interquartile range). Results: Eleven CPGs were included. Highest scoring domains for AGREE II were clarity of presentation (82% [76–87%]) and scope and purpose (78% [66–83%]). Lowest scoring domains were applicability (37% [32–42%]) and stakeholder involvement (46% [33–51%]). Eight (73%) CPGs provided recommendations relating to energy expenditure determination; scores were low overall (37% [36–40%]) and across individual domains. Conclusions: Nutrition CPGs for critically ill patients are developed using systematic methods but lack engagement with key stakeholders and guidance to support application. The quality of energy expenditure determination recommendations is low.
4 citations
TL;DR: The data suggest that the use of simple predictive equations may potentially lead to overfeeding in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID‐19 and the energy estimated with EEVCO2 correlated better with IC values than energy derived from weight‐based calculations.
Abstract: Abstract Background Indirect calorimetry (IC) is the gold standard for measuring resting energy expenditure. Energy expenditure (EE) estimated by ventilator‐derived carbon dioxide consumption (EEVCO2) has also been proposed. In the absence of IC, predictive weight‐based equations have been recommended to estimate daily energy requirements. This study aims to compare simple predictive weight‐based equations with those estimated by EEVCO2 and IC in mechanically ventilated patients of COVID‐19. Methods Retrospective study of a cohort of critically ill adult patients with COVID‐19 requiring mechanical ventilation and artificial nutrition to compare energy estimations by three methods through the calculation of bias and precision agreement, reliability, and accuracy rates. Results In 58 mechanically ventilated patients, a total of 117 paired measurements were obtained. The mean estimated energy derived from weight‐based calculations was 2576 ± 469 kcal/24 h, as compared with 1507 ± 499 kcal/24 h when EE was estimated by IC, resulting in a significant bias of 1069 kcal/day (95% CI [−2158 to 18.7 kcal]; P < 0.001). Similarly, estimated mean EEVCO2 was 1388 ± 467 kcal/24 h when compared with estimation of EE from IC. A significant bias of only 118 kcal/day (95% CI [−187 to 422 kcal]; P < 0.001), compared by the Bland‐Altman plot, was noted. Conclusion The energy estimated with EEVCO2 correlated better with IC values than energy derived from weight‐based calculations. Our data suggest that the use of simple predictive equations may potentially lead to overfeeding in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID‐19.
3 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: During the first 2 months of the current outbreak, Covid-19 spread rapidly throughout China and caused varying degrees of illness, and patients often presented without fever, and many did not have abnormal radiologic findings.
Abstract: Background Since December 2019, when coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) emerged in Wuhan city and rapidly spread throughout China, data have been needed on the clinical characteristics of...
22,622 citations
TL;DR: The guidelines reiterate the importance of nutrition assessment-particularly, the detection of malnourished patients who are most vulnerable and therefore may benefit from timely intervention and there is a need for renewed focus on accurate estimation of energy needs and attention to optimizing protein intake.
Abstract: This document represents the first collaboration between 2 organizations-the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition and the Society of Critical Care Medicine-to describe best practices in nutrition therapy in critically ill children. The target of these guidelines is intended to be the pediatric critically ill patient (>1 month and 2-3 days in a PICU admitting medical, surgical, and cardiac patients. In total, 2032 citations were scanned for relevance. The PubMed/MEDLINE search resulted in 960 citations for clinical trials and 925 citations for cohort studies. The EMBASE search for clinical trials culled 1661 citations. In total, the search for clinical trials yielded 1107 citations, whereas the cohort search yielded 925. After careful review, 16 randomized controlled trials and 37 cohort studies appeared to answer 1 of the 8 preidentified question groups for this guideline. We used the GRADE criteria (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) to adjust the evidence grade based on assessment of the quality of study design and execution. These guidelines are not intended for neonates or adult patients. The guidelines reiterate the importance of nutrition assessment-particularly, the detection of malnourished patients who are most vulnerable and therefore may benefit from timely intervention. There is a need for renewed focus on accurate estimation of energy needs and attention to optimizing protein intake. Indirect calorimetry, where feasible, and cautious use of estimating equations and increased surveillance for unintended caloric underfeeding and overfeeding are recommended. Optimal protein intake and its correlation with clinical outcomes are areas of great interest. The optimal route and timing of nutrient delivery are areas of intense debate and investigations. Enteral nutrition remains the preferred route for nutrient delivery. Several strategies to optimize enteral nutrition during critical illness have emerged. The role of supplemental parenteral nutrition has been highlighted, and a delayed approach appears to be beneficial. Immunonutrition cannot be currently recommended. Overall, the pediatric critical care population is heterogeneous, and a nuanced approach to individualizing nutrition support with the aim of improving clinical outcomes is necessary.
2,947 citations
TL;DR: An emergency task force was formed by the Government of Lombardy and local health authorities to lead the response to the outbreak and a forecast of estimated ICU demand over the coming weeks is provided.
Abstract: On February 20, 2020, a patient in his 30s admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in Codogno Hospital (Lodi, Lombardy, Italy) tested positive for a new coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). He had a history of atypical pneumonia that was not responding to treatment, but he was not considered at risk for COVID-19 infection.1 The positive result was immediately reported to the Lombardy health care system and governmental offices. During the next 24 hours, the number of reported positive cases increased to 36. This situation was considered a serious development for several reasons: the patient (“patient 1”) was healthy and young; in less than 24 hours, 36 additional cases were identified, without links to patient 1 or previously identified positive cases already in the country; it was not possible to identify with certainty the source of transmission to patient 1 at the time; and, because patient 1 was in the ICU and there were already 36 cases by day 2, chances were that a cluster of unknown magnitude was present and additional spread was likely. On February 21, an emergency task force was formed by the Government of Lombardy and local health authorities to lead the response to the outbreak. This Viewpoint provides a summary of the response of the COVID-19 Lombardy ICU network and a forecast of estimated ICU demand over the coming weeks (projected to March 20, 2020).
1,778 citations
TL;DR: These guidelines offer basic recommendations that are supported by review and analysis of the current literature, other national and international guidelines, and a blend of expert opinion and clinical practicality that are directed toward generalized patient populations.
Abstract: A.S.P.E.N. and SCCM are both nonprofit organizations composed of multidisciplinary healthcare professionals. The mission of A.S.P.E.N. is to improve patient care by advancing the science and practice of clinical nutrition and metabolism. The mission of SCCM is to secure the highest quality care for all critically ill and injured patients. Guideline Limitations: These A.S.P.E.N.−SCCM Clinical Guidelines are based on general conclusions of health professionals who, in developing such guidelines, have balanced potential benefits to be derived from a particular mode of medical therapy against certain risks inherent with such therapy. However, practice guidelines are not intended as absolute requirements. The use of these practice guidelines does not in any way project or guarantee any specific benefit in outcome or survival. The judgment of the healthcare professional based on individual circumstances of the patient must always take precedence over the recommendations in these guidelines. The guidelines offer basic recommendations that are supported by review and analysis of the current literature, other national and international guidelines, and a blend of expert opinion and clinical practicality. The population of critically ill patients in an intensive care unit (ICU) is not homogeneous. Many of the studies on which the guidelines are based are limited by sample size, patient heterogeneity, variability in disease severity, lack of baseline nutritional status, and insufficient statistical power for analysis. Periodic Guideline Review and Update: This particular report is an update and expansion of guidelines published by A.S.P.E.N. and SCCM in 2009 (1). Governing bodies of both A.S.P.E.N. and SCCM have mandated that these guidelines be updated every three to five years. The database of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that served as the platform for the analysis of the literature was assembled in a joint “harmonization process” with the Canadian Clinical Guidelines group. Once completed, each group operated separately in their interpretation of the studies and derivation of guideline recommendations (2). The current A.S.P.E.N. and SCCM guidelines included in this paper were derived from data obtained via literature searches by the authors through December 31, 2013. Although the committee was aware of landmark studies published after this date, these data were not included in this manuscript. The process by which the literature was evaluated necessitated a common end date for the search review. Adding a last-minute landmark trial would have introduced bias unless a formalized literature search was re-conducted for all sections of the manuscript. Target Patient Population for Guideline: The target of these guidelines is intended to be the adult (≥ 18 years) critically ill patient expected to require a length of stay (LOS) greater than 2 or 3 days in a medical ICU (MICU) or surgical ICU (SICU). The current guidelines were expanded to include a number of additional subsets of patients who met the above criteria, but were not included in the previous 2009 guidelines. Specific patient populations addressed by these expanded and updated guidelines include organ failure (pulmonary, renal, and liver), acute pancreatitis, surgical subsets (trauma, traumatic brain injury [TBI], open abdomen [OA], and burns), sepsis, postoperative major surgery, chronic critically ill, and critically ill obese. These guidelines are directed toward generalized patient populations but, like any other management strategy in the ICU, nutrition therapy should be tailored to the individual patient. Target Audience: The intended use of these guidelines is for all healthcare providers involved in nutrition therapy of the critically ill, primarily physicians, nurses, dietitians, and pharmacists. Methodology: The authors compiled clinical questions reflecting key management issues in nutrition therapy. A committee of multidisciplinary experts in clinical nutrition composed of physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and dietitians was jointly convened by the two societies.
1,734 citations
Rabin Medical Center1, University of Tartu2, University of Lausanne3, McMaster University4, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust5, The Catholic University of America6, Geneva College7, Université libre de Bruxelles8, Jagiellonian University Medical College9, University of Hohenheim10
TL;DR: Particular conditions frequently observed in intensive care such as patients with dysphagia, frail patients, multiple trauma patients, abdominal surgery, sepsis, and obesity are discussed to guide the practitioner toward the best evidence based therapy.
1,474 citations