Show simple item record

FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLin, Jiajiaen
dc.contributor.authorKe, Luen
dc.contributor.authorDoig, Gordon Sen
dc.contributor.authorYe, Boen
dc.contributor.authorJiang, Zhengyingen
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Zhiyongen
dc.contributor.authorGuo, Fengen
dc.contributor.authorYin, Jiangtaoen
dc.contributor.authorYu, Wenkuien
dc.contributor.authorSun, Jiakuien
dc.contributor.authorSun, Liqunen
dc.contributor.authorDing, Renyuen
dc.contributor.authorXu, Hongyangen
dc.contributor.authorChang, Zhigangen
dc.contributor.authorLong, Yien
dc.contributor.authorQian, Yajunen
dc.contributor.authorTong, Zhihuien
dc.contributor.authorLi, Weiqinen
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-02T04:55:15Z
dc.date.available2021-06-02T04:55:15Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2123/25279
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic is spreading all over the world. With the number of cases increasing rapidly, the epidemiological data on the nutritional practice is scarce. In this study, we aim to describe the clinical characteristics and nutritional practice in a cohort of critically ill COVID-19 patients. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: This is a multicenter, ambidirectional cohort study conducted at 11 hospitals in Hubei Province, China. All eligible critical COVID-19 patients in the study hospital intensive care units at 00:00, March 6th, 2020, were included. Data collection was performed via written case report forms. RESULTS: A total of 44 patients were identified and enrolled, of whom eight died during the 28-day outcome follow- up period. The median interval between hospital admission and the study day was 24 (interquartile range, 13- 26) days and 52.2% (23 of 44) of patients were on invasive mechanical ventilation. The median nutrition risk in critically ill (mNUTRIC) score was 3 (interquartile range, 2-5) on the study day. During the enrolment day, 68.2% (30 of 44) of patients received enteral nutrition (EN), while 6.8% (3 of 44) received parenteral nutrition (PN) alone. Nausea and aspiration were uncommon, with a prevalence of 11.4% (5 of 44) and 6.8% (3 of 44), respectively. As for energy delivery, 69.7% (23 of 33) of patients receiving EN and/or PN were achieving their prescribed targets. CONCLUSIONS: The study showed that EN was frequently applied in critical COVID-19 patients. Energy delivery may be suboptimal in this study requiring more attention.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.rightsCopyright All Rights Reserveden
dc.subjectCOVID-19en
dc.subjectCoronavirusen
dc.titleNutritional practice in critically ill COVID-19 patients: A multicenter ambidirectional cohort study in Wuhan and Jingzhou.en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.doi10.6133/apjcn.202103_30(1).0003
usyd.facultySeS faculties schools::Faculty of Medicine and Healthen


Show simple item record

Associated file/s

There are no files associated with this item.

Associated collections

Show simple item record

There are no previous versions of the item available.