Impact of nutritional support on clinical outcome in patients at nutritional risk: A multicenter, prospective cohort study in Baltimore and Beijing teaching hospitals

Bin Jie, Zhu Ming Jiang, Marie T Nolan, David Thomas Efron, Shai Nan Zhu, Kang Yu, Jens Kondrup

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the impact of nutritional support on clinical outcomes in patients at nutritional risk defined by the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, hospitalized patients from three departments in Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore and two teaching hospitals in Beijing were recruited from March 2007 to May 2008. Data were collected on the nutritional risk screening, application of parenteral nutrition and enteral nutrition, surgery, complications, and length of stay. Results: There were 1831 patients recruited, with 45.2% of them at nutritional risk. Of the "at-risk" patients, the complication rate was significantly lower in the nutritional-support group than in the no-support group (20.3% versus 28.1%, P = 0.009), mainly because of the lower rate of infectious complications (10.5% versus 18.9%, P <0.001). Subgroup analysis showed the complication rate was significantly lower in the enteral nutrition group (P <0.001) but not in the parenteral nutrition group (P = 0.29) when compared with the no-support group. Of the patients without nutritional risk, the complication rate was not different between the nutritional-support group and the no-support group (P = 0.10). Multivariate analysis showed nutritional support was a protective factor for complications in at-risk patients when adjusted for confounders (odds ratio 0.54, P <0.001). No difference in length of stay was found. Conclusion: The findings suggested that nutritional support was beneficial to the patients at nutritional risk according to Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 by a lower complication rate.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1088-1093
Number of pages6
JournalNutrition (Burbank, Los Angeles County, Calif.)
Volume26
Issue number11-12
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2010

Fingerprint

Baltimore
Nutritional Support
Teaching Hospitals
Cohort Studies
Prospective Studies
Self-Help Groups
Parenteral Nutrition
Enteral Nutrition
Length of Stay
Beijing
Multivariate Analysis
Odds Ratio

Keywords

  • Complications
  • Enteral nutrition
  • Malnutrition
  • Nutritional risk screening 2002
  • Parenteral nutrition

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism
  • Nutrition and Dietetics

Cite this

Impact of nutritional support on clinical outcome in patients at nutritional risk : A multicenter, prospective cohort study in Baltimore and Beijing teaching hospitals. / Jie, Bin; Jiang, Zhu Ming; Nolan, Marie T; Efron, David Thomas; Zhu, Shai Nan; Yu, Kang; Kondrup, Jens.

In: Nutrition (Burbank, Los Angeles County, Calif.), Vol. 26, No. 11-12, 11.2010, p. 1088-1093.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a7f9165e3f904f78ace3ba7204c2349e,
title = "Impact of nutritional support on clinical outcome in patients at nutritional risk: A multicenter, prospective cohort study in Baltimore and Beijing teaching hospitals",
abstract = "Objective: To evaluate the impact of nutritional support on clinical outcomes in patients at nutritional risk defined by the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, hospitalized patients from three departments in Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore and two teaching hospitals in Beijing were recruited from March 2007 to May 2008. Data were collected on the nutritional risk screening, application of parenteral nutrition and enteral nutrition, surgery, complications, and length of stay. Results: There were 1831 patients recruited, with 45.2{\%} of them at nutritional risk. Of the {"}at-risk{"} patients, the complication rate was significantly lower in the nutritional-support group than in the no-support group (20.3{\%} versus 28.1{\%}, P = 0.009), mainly because of the lower rate of infectious complications (10.5{\%} versus 18.9{\%}, P <0.001). Subgroup analysis showed the complication rate was significantly lower in the enteral nutrition group (P <0.001) but not in the parenteral nutrition group (P = 0.29) when compared with the no-support group. Of the patients without nutritional risk, the complication rate was not different between the nutritional-support group and the no-support group (P = 0.10). Multivariate analysis showed nutritional support was a protective factor for complications in at-risk patients when adjusted for confounders (odds ratio 0.54, P <0.001). No difference in length of stay was found. Conclusion: The findings suggested that nutritional support was beneficial to the patients at nutritional risk according to Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 by a lower complication rate.",
keywords = "Complications, Enteral nutrition, Malnutrition, Nutritional risk screening 2002, Parenteral nutrition",
author = "Bin Jie and Jiang, {Zhu Ming} and Nolan, {Marie T} and Efron, {David Thomas} and Zhu, {Shai Nan} and Kang Yu and Jens Kondrup",
year = "2010",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1016/j.nut.2009.08.027",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "26",
pages = "1088--1093",
journal = "Nutrition",
issn = "0899-9007",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "11-12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Impact of nutritional support on clinical outcome in patients at nutritional risk

T2 - A multicenter, prospective cohort study in Baltimore and Beijing teaching hospitals

AU - Jie, Bin

AU - Jiang, Zhu Ming

AU - Nolan, Marie T

AU - Efron, David Thomas

AU - Zhu, Shai Nan

AU - Yu, Kang

AU - Kondrup, Jens

PY - 2010/11

Y1 - 2010/11

N2 - Objective: To evaluate the impact of nutritional support on clinical outcomes in patients at nutritional risk defined by the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, hospitalized patients from three departments in Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore and two teaching hospitals in Beijing were recruited from March 2007 to May 2008. Data were collected on the nutritional risk screening, application of parenteral nutrition and enteral nutrition, surgery, complications, and length of stay. Results: There were 1831 patients recruited, with 45.2% of them at nutritional risk. Of the "at-risk" patients, the complication rate was significantly lower in the nutritional-support group than in the no-support group (20.3% versus 28.1%, P = 0.009), mainly because of the lower rate of infectious complications (10.5% versus 18.9%, P <0.001). Subgroup analysis showed the complication rate was significantly lower in the enteral nutrition group (P <0.001) but not in the parenteral nutrition group (P = 0.29) when compared with the no-support group. Of the patients without nutritional risk, the complication rate was not different between the nutritional-support group and the no-support group (P = 0.10). Multivariate analysis showed nutritional support was a protective factor for complications in at-risk patients when adjusted for confounders (odds ratio 0.54, P <0.001). No difference in length of stay was found. Conclusion: The findings suggested that nutritional support was beneficial to the patients at nutritional risk according to Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 by a lower complication rate.

AB - Objective: To evaluate the impact of nutritional support on clinical outcomes in patients at nutritional risk defined by the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, hospitalized patients from three departments in Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore and two teaching hospitals in Beijing were recruited from March 2007 to May 2008. Data were collected on the nutritional risk screening, application of parenteral nutrition and enteral nutrition, surgery, complications, and length of stay. Results: There were 1831 patients recruited, with 45.2% of them at nutritional risk. Of the "at-risk" patients, the complication rate was significantly lower in the nutritional-support group than in the no-support group (20.3% versus 28.1%, P = 0.009), mainly because of the lower rate of infectious complications (10.5% versus 18.9%, P <0.001). Subgroup analysis showed the complication rate was significantly lower in the enteral nutrition group (P <0.001) but not in the parenteral nutrition group (P = 0.29) when compared with the no-support group. Of the patients without nutritional risk, the complication rate was not different between the nutritional-support group and the no-support group (P = 0.10). Multivariate analysis showed nutritional support was a protective factor for complications in at-risk patients when adjusted for confounders (odds ratio 0.54, P <0.001). No difference in length of stay was found. Conclusion: The findings suggested that nutritional support was beneficial to the patients at nutritional risk according to Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 by a lower complication rate.

KW - Complications

KW - Enteral nutrition

KW - Malnutrition

KW - Nutritional risk screening 2002

KW - Parenteral nutrition

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77957799596&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77957799596&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.nut.2009.08.027

DO - 10.1016/j.nut.2009.08.027

M3 - Article

C2 - 19963351

AN - SCOPUS:77957799596

VL - 26

SP - 1088

EP - 1093

JO - Nutrition

JF - Nutrition

SN - 0899-9007

IS - 11-12

ER -