Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/22417
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorDeane, Adam M-
dc.contributor.authorLittle, Lorraine-
dc.contributor.authorBellomo, Rinaldo-
dc.contributor.authorChapman, Marianne J-
dc.contributor.authorDavies, Andrew R-
dc.contributor.authorFerrie, Suzie-
dc.contributor.authorHorowitz, Michael-
dc.contributor.authorHurford, Sally-
dc.contributor.authorLange, Kylie-
dc.contributor.authorLitton, Edward-
dc.contributor.authorMackle, Diane-
dc.contributor.authorO'Connor, Stephanie-
dc.contributor.authorParker, Jane-
dc.contributor.authorPeake, Sandra L-
dc.contributor.authorPresneill, Jeffrey J-
dc.contributor.authorRidley, Emma J-
dc.contributor.authorSingh, Vanessa-
dc.contributor.authorvan Haren, Frank-
dc.contributor.authorWilliams, Patricia-
dc.contributor.authorYoung, Paul-
dc.contributor.authorIwashyna, Theodore J-
dc.date2020-
dc.date.accessioned2020-01-13T04:06:14Z-
dc.date.available2020-01-13T04:06:14Z-
dc.date.issued2020-01-06-
dc.identifier.citationAmerican journal of respiratory and critical care medicine 2020; online first: 6 January-
dc.identifier.urihttp://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/22417-
dc.description.abstractThe long-term effects of delivering approximately 100% of recommended calorie intake via the enteral route during critical illness compared to a lesser amount of calories are unknown. Our hypotheses were that achieving approximately 100% of recommended calorie intake during critical illness would increase quality of life scores, return to work and key life activities and reduce death and disability six months later. We conducted a multicenter, blinded, parallel group, randomized clinical trial, with 3957 mechanically ventilated critically ill adults allocated to energy-dense (1.5 kcal/ml) or routine (1.0 kcal/ml) enteral nutrition. Participants assigned energy-dense nutrition received more calories (% recommended energy intake, mean (SD) (energy-dense: 103% (28) vs. usual: 69% (18)). Mortality at day-180 was similar (560/1895 (29.6%) vs. 539/1920 (28.1%); relative risk 1.05 (95%CI, 0.95 to 1.16)). At a median [IQR] of 185 [182, 193] days after randomization, 2492 survivors were surveyed and reported similar quality of life (EuroQol five dimensions five-level quality of life questionnaire visual analogue scale, median [IQR]: 75 [60-85]; group difference: 0 (95%CI, 0 to 0)). Similar numbers of participants returned to work with no difference in hours worked or effectiveness at work (n=818). There was no observed difference in disability (n=1208) or participation in key life activities (n=705). The delivery of approximately 100% compared to 70% of recommended calorie intake during critical illness does not improve quality of life, or functional outcomes, or increase the number of survivors six months later. Clinical trial registration available at www.clinicaltrials.gov, ID: NCT02306746.-
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.subjectcritical illness-
dc.subjectdisability and health-
dc.subjectenteral nutrition-
dc.subjectquality of life-
dc.titleOutcomes Six-Months After 100% or 70% of Enteral Calorie Requirements During Critical Illness (TARGET): A Randomized Controlled Trial.-
dc.typeJournal Article-
dc.identifier.journaltitleAmerican journal of respiratory and critical care medicine-
dc.identifier.affiliationMedical Research Institute of New Zealand, 194581, Wellington, New Zealanden
dc.identifier.affiliationThe University of Adelaide Adelaide Medical School, 110466, Centre of Research Excellence in Translating Nutritional Science to Good Health, Adelaide, South Australia, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationRoyal Melbourne Hospital, 90134, Department of Medicine, Melbourne, Victoria, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliation.en
dc.identifier.affiliationUniversity of Michigan Department of Internal Medicine, 173243, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United Statesen
dc.identifier.affiliationThe University of Adelaide Discipline of Acute Care Medicine, 242032, Adelaide, South Australia, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationAustralian National University, 2219, Medical School, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationThe University of Melbourne Melbourne Medical School, 276235, Department of Medicine and Radiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationFiona Stanley Hospital, 418838, Intensive Care Unit, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationUniversity of Adelaide Faculty of Health Sciences, 50072, Discipline of Acute Care Medicine, Adelaide, South Australia, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationRoyal Melbourne Hospital, 90134, Intensive Care Unit, Melbourne, Victoria, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationMonash University School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, 161667, Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationRoyal Adelaide Hospital, 1062, Adelaide, South Australia, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationIntensive Care Unit, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationRoyal Prince Alfred Hospital, 2205, Department of Nutrition & Dietetics, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australiaen
dc.identifier.doi10.1164/rccm.201909-1810OC-
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-7620-5577-
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0001-8037-4229-
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-3428-3083-
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-1650-8939-
dc.identifier.pubmedid31904995-
Appears in Collections:Journal articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.