Effect of a multidisciplinary nutrition management model in patients with critical illness: A randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Managing nutrition in critically ill patients involves many medical fields. However, the nutrition management of critically ill patients has not been comprehensive enough to achieve multidisciplinary team cooperation in China and many other countries. Furthermore, there is no standardized management model or process.

AIM: To explore the multidisciplinary cooperative nutrition management model for critically ill patients in the ICUs in China, verify its clinical effect and provide a clinical practice reference for the nutrition management of critically ill patients.

STUDY DESIGN: A multidisciplinary cooperative nutrition management team, including ICU doctors, ICU nurses, clinical nutritionists, clinical pharmacists and radiologists, was established for critically ill patients. According to a literature review and domestic guidelines, the standardized process of nutritional management for critically ill patients was constructed through the Delphi expert consultation method. One hundred thirty-two patients in the ICU were randomly divided into an experimental group and a control group. A routine nutrition management mode, which was the nutrition management plan mainly formulated by the ICU doctor in charge only and the ICU nurses responsible for the implementation and monitoring of nutrition support, was implemented in the control group. And a multidisciplinary nutrition management mode, which was the nutrition management implemented by the multidisciplinary teams with the standardized nutrition management process for critically ill patients, was adopted in the experimental group. The early nutritional support rate, nutritional indexes (serum albumin, preprotein, haemoglobin and hs-CPR), mechanical ventilation time, ICU hospitalization days and hospitalization expenses of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS: The early nutritional support rates of the experimental group and the control group were 89.39% and 69.7%, respectively (χ2  = .002, p = .031). Serum albumin (35.4 vs. 33.1 g/L), preprotein (153.2 vs. 125.9 mg/L) and haemoglobin (97.5 vs. 90.6 g/L) in the experimental group were significantly higher than in the control group (p = .000, .016, .033). The days of hospitalization in the ICU of the experimental group were shorter than in the control group (5.1 vs. 7.1, p = .039). High-sensitivity C-reactive protein, the days of mechanical ventilation and ICU hospitalization expenses of the experimental group were lower than in the control group; however, the difference was not statistically significant (p = .713, .068, .489).

CONCLUSIONS: Because of the severity and complexity of patients' diseases, it is necessary to implement multidisciplinary nutrition management for critically ill patients. Research shows that the multidisciplinary nutrition management standardized process for critically ill patients that was constructed in this study can effectively improve nutritional indexes such as serum albumin, preprotein and haemoglobin, shorten the length of stay in the ICU and promote the rehabilitation of patients, and this process be widely used in the clinic.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Structured multidisciplinary nutrition management operational processes can guide clinical practice. They could be widely used in the clinical nutrition management of critically ill patients in critical care units or other departments.