Association between protein intake and functional capacity in critically ill patients: A retrospective cohort study
- PMID: 39018085
- DOI: 10.1002/jpen.2673
Association between protein intake and functional capacity in critically ill patients: A retrospective cohort study
Abstract
Background: Intensive care unit (ICU) protein benchmarks are based on mortality and morbidity; whether these targets also support functional recovery is unknown. We assessed whether different protein doses influenced patients' functional capacity, measured by the Chelsea Physical Assessment score (CPAx).
Methods: Single-center retrospective cohort study on ICU survivors with length of stay ≥7 days admitted between October 2014 and September 2020. Eligible patients were divided according to protein intake (g/kg/day): low (<0.8), medium (0.8-1.19), high (1.2-1.5), and very high (>1.5). Protein dose effect on CPAx was assessed at ICU discharge with analysis of covariance adjusting for age, illness severity, hospital length of stay before ICU admission, time to start nutrition support, and mechanical ventilation duration. We also investigated effect modification by energy intake and nutrition status.
Results: Enrolled patients (n = 531) were similar for age, nutrition status, and illness severity across groups. CPAxs were nonlinearly associated with protein doses and similar among low, medium, and very high groups. The CPAx for the high group was statistically different (P = 0.014), indicating that the data of three groups could be pooled. Mean CPAx difference remained statistically significant after adjusting for confounding variables (3.9 ± 1.8, P = 0.029 in the four-group model, and 2.7 ± 0.9, P = 0.003 in the pooled two-group model). Energy intake was equivalent between groups and did not modify CPAx. The high group had superior CPAx in both well-nourished and malnourished patients, indicating nutrition status was not an effect modifier.
Conclusion: Protein dose 1.2-1.5 g/kg/day was associated with superior functional capacity at ICU discharge compared with other doses. Neither energy intake nor nutrition status modified functional capacity across groups; therefore, the results appear to be influenced by 1.2-1.5 g/kg/day.
Keywords: critical illness; functional capacity; nutrition support; protein; weakness.
© 2024 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Taverny G, Lescot T, Pardo E, Thonon F, Maarouf M, Alberti C. Outcomes used in randomised controlled trials of nutrition in the critically ill: a systematic review. Crit Care. 2019;23(1):12. doi:10.1186/s13054-018-2303-7
-
- Needham DM, Sepulveda KA, Dinglas VD, et al. Core outcome measures for clinical research in acute respiratory failure survivors an international modified delphi consensus study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017;196(9):1122‐1130. doi:10.1164/rccm.201702-0372OC
-
- Dinglas VD, Faraone LN, Needham DM. Understanding patient‐important outcomes after critical illness: a synthesis of recent qualitative, empirical, and consensus‐related studies. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2018;24(5):401‐409. doi:10.1097/MCC.0000000000000533
-
- Kaukonen KM, Bailey M, Suzuki S, Pilcher D, Bellomo R. Mortality related to severe sepsis and septic shock among critically ill patients in Australia and New Zealand, 2000‐2012. JAMA. 2014;311(13):1308‐1316. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.2637
-
- Fazzini B, Märkl T, Costas C, et al. The rate and assessment of muscle wasting during critical illness: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Crit Care. 2023;27(1):2. doi:10.1186/s13054-022-04253-0
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
