Application strategy and effect analysis of nutritional support nursing for critically ill patients in intensive care units. Issue 38 (23rd September 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Li, Yunting; Liu, Haitang
• Is Part Of: Medicine. Volume 101:Issue 38(2022)
• Page Start: e30396
• Publication Date: 2022-09-23
• Subjects: complications -- critically ill -- enteral nutrition -- nutritional support; Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine -- Périodiques; Geneeskunde; Medicine; Periodicals; Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000030396
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0025-7974

Abstract

Abstract : We investigate nutritional support and nursing status of critical patients in intensive care units (ICUs) to understand the latest nutritional support guidelines' implementation by clinical medical staff; identify problems in nutritional support and nursing for these patients, analyze causes, and present suggestions; and provide a clinical/theoretical bases to improve nutritional support implementation and nursing strategies for them. Clinical case information of 304 critically ill ICU patients admitted from July 2017 to July 2021 was analyzed. They were divided into the experimental (nutritional support) and control (no nutritional support) groups to compare their laboratory indicators, 28-day case fatality rate, and infection incidence. Least significant difference was used for postanalysis of statistically significant items to obtain pairwise comparisons. Nutrition support strategies for ICU patients are consistent with guidelines but have an implementation gap. No statistically significant differences were found in hemoglobin (HB), total serum protein (TP), serum albumin (ALB), transferrin (TF), prealbumin (PA), and total lymphocyte count (TLC) in experimental group patients compared with the control group within 24 hours (before nutritional support, P > .05). No statistically significant differences were also found in HB, TP, TLC, and ALB between the enteral nutrition + parenteral nutrition (EN + PN), total EN (TEN), total PN (TPN), and control groups on admission day 7 (after nutritional support, P > .05), while statistically significant differences existed between PA and TF ( P < .05). TF of patients supported by TEN was higher (statistically significant difference, P < .05). PA in patients receiving TEN and EN + PN support was higher than in control group patients (statistically significant difference, P < .05). Compared with the control group, in experimental group patients, infection incidence was significantly lower (40.2% vs 62.9%, P < .05); incidence of complications was lower, but not statistically significant (40.2% vs 57.1%, P > .05); and 28-day mortalities were significantly lower (26.7% vs 45.7%, P < .05). Nutritional support can reduce hospitalization complications and 28-day mortality in critical patients, but its implementation must be standardized. Especially for patients with gastrointestinal dysfunction, personalized/standardized nutrition strategies and nursing procedures are needed when PN support is applied, and training of clinical medical staff should be strengthened to improve nutrition support's efficiency.