Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT03292237

Intensive Nutrition in Critically Ill Adults

Despite the widespread use of nutrition therapy, no large scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated positive outcomes with delivery of nutrition therapy early in critical illness, with some showing no effect with delayed nutrition or even harm.

There are several possible reasons for the lack of observed benefit from RCTs to date; interventions have been short in duration (usually 3-10 days after intensive care unit (ICU) admission), perhaps applied at the incorrect time in regards to the patients metabolism and recovery, do not consider the patients nutrition risk, and have not addressed what happens to nutrition intake post ICU in critically ill individuals. This may explain why RCTs to date have not observed any positive associations with the delivery of nutrition; our focus to date may have been on the wrong stage of illness. A future study is thus urgently needed, which addresses the deficiencies in current RCTs by optimizing nutrition delivery for the whole hospital stay and collecting meaningful clinical, process and outcome data, which will potentially inform a larger trial of a similar nature.

This initial study aims to determine whether optimization of energy using a pre-tested supplemental parenteral nutrition (PN) strategy in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and an intensive nutrition intervention in the post ICU period will deliver more total energy than standard nutrition care during hospital admission in a group of critically ill patients with at least one organ system failure.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Phase 2

Primary location

Blacktown Hospital, Blacktown, New South Wales, Australia

Loading trial locations.

About this study

Background:

Nutrition is a commonly provided therapy in critical illness, but data about effectiveness is sparse. Best practice guidelines recommend enteral nutrition (EN), a specialised solution delivered into the gastrointestinal tract, as the first line of nutrition therapy. The majority of best practice guidelines also recommend delivery of energy and protein amounts close to predicted requirements in critical illness over the course of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission, however the only evidence to support this is from observational data. Although recommended that energy and protein requirements be met, and observational data suggests this is of benefit, there are practical challenges with the provision of EN. International practice surveys report the average energy and protein provided is approximately 59% of the patients predicted requirements, for multifactorial reasons. The addition of parenteral (intravenous) nutrition has been proposed as a method to provide additional energy when EN is insufficient, termed supplemental parenteral nutrition (PN). The ability of this strategy to deliver additional energy and protein to patients during critical illness has been proven in several feasibility/pilot trials, but the benefit on clinical and functional outcomes is unknown.

Despite observational data suggesting benefit when energy and protein delivery is optimised close to requirements, no large scale randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have confirmed improved clinical outcomes in critical illness, with some showing no effect with delayed nutrition or even harm. There are several possible reasons for the lack of observed benefit from RCTs to date; the interventions may have been applied at a time when the patient's metabolism is not in a phase of recovery; interventions have been short in duration and; studies have not addressed what happens to nutrition intake in the post ICU period of hospitalisation in critically ill individuals.

Aims:

To determine whether the use of a pre-tested supplemental PN strategy in the ICU and an intensive nutrition intervention after discharge to the hospital ward is feasible and will deliver more total energy than standard nutrition care over the entire hospital stay, in critically ill patients with at least one organ system failure.

A further aim is to develop a research program that will determine whether optimisation of energy to critically ill patients over the entire period of hospitalisation improves clinically-meaningful outcomes.

Hypothesis:

In critically ill patients with at least one organ failure, the use of a supplemental PN strategy in ICU and an intensive nutrition intervention on the hospital ward will lead to an increase in daily energy delivery of at least 15% over the entire hospital stay when compared to standard care.

Fifteen percent has been estimated as the minimum acceptable clinical difference between the two groups.

Objectives:

The major objectives are:

  • To determine whether the whole hospital nutrition intervention leads to increased amounts of total energy delivered over the period of hospital stay
  • To determine if the whole hospital nutrition intervention is safe in regards to adverse effects
  • To determine if the post-ICU nutrition intervention is practically feasible when applied in multiple hospitals, across multiple wards
  • To measure the clinical outcomes in patients and provide information to assist design of a larger randomised controlled trial

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

Patients in intensive care who meet all of the following will be eligible:

  • Admitted to intensive care between 72 hours and 120 hours
  • Receiving invasive ventilator support
  • At least 18 years of age
  • Have central venous access suitable for PN solution administration
  • Have 1 or more organ system failure (respiratory, cardiovascular or renal) related to their acute illness defined as:
  • PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 300 mmHg
  • Currently on 1 or more continuous inotrope/vasopressor infusion which were started at least 4 hours ago at a minimum dose of:
  • Noradrenaline ≥ 0.1mcg/kg/min
  • Adrenaline ≥ 0.1 mcg/kg/min
  • Any dose of vasopressin
  • Milrinone > 0.1 mcg/kg/min
  • Renal dysfunction defined as:
  • Serum creatinine 2.0-2.9 times baseline OR
  • Urine output 0.5ml/kg/hr for ≥ 12 hours OR
  • Currently receiving renal replacement therapy
  • Currently has an intracranial pressure monitor or ventricular drain in situ

Exclusion criteria

Patients will be excluded if:

  • Both EN and PN cannot be delivered at enrolment (i.e. either an enteral tube or a central venous catheter cannot be placed or clinicians feel that EN or PN cannot be safely administered due to any other reason)
  • Currently receiving PN
  • Clinician believes a specific parenteral formula is indicated
  • Death is imminent in the next 96 hours
  • There is a current treatment limitation in place or the patient is unlikely to survive to 6 months due to underlying/chronic illness
  • More than 80% of energy requirements have been satisfactorily delivered via the enteral route in the last 24 hours
  • Dialysis dependent chronic renal failure
  • Suspected or known pregnancy
  • Product contraindication
  • The treating clinician does not believe the study to be in the best interest of the patient

Treatment and study plan

Supplemental parenteral nutrition

Dietary Supplement

Supplemental parenteral nutrition OLIMEL N12E (Baxter Healthcare Corporation)

Primary outcomes

  1. Daily energy delivered from nutrition therapy

    Time frame: Day 28

    Daily energy delivered from nutrition therapy

Secondary outcomes

  1. Nutrition intake

    Time frame: Day 28

    Daily protein intake, Energy and protein intake by location (ICU and ward)

  2. Duration hospital stay

    Time frame: Day 28

    Duration of hospital stay in survivors and non-survivors

  3. Ventilator Free Days

    Time frame: Day 28

    Ventilator Free Days (VFDs) at study day 28

  4. Total blood stream infection rate

    Time frame: Day 28

    Total blood stream infection rate

Other outcomes

  1. Duration of ICU stay

    Time frame: Day 28

    Duration of ICU stay in survivors and non survivors

  2. Duration of Mechanical Ventilation

    Time frame: Day 28

    Duration of Mechanical Ventilation to study day 28 in survivors and non-survivors

  3. ICU mobility scale

    Time frame: Day 28

    ICU mobility scale at ICU discharge

  4. Mortality

    Time frame: Day 28

    In hospital and 28 day mortality

  5. Blood stream infections

    Time frame: Day 28

    Number of blood stream infections to day 28, time to any blood stream infection

  6. Weight

    Time frame: Day 28

    Weight at hospital discharge

  7. Frailty

    Time frame: 90 days

    Clinical frailty score

  8. European Quality Of Life 5 Dimensions 5 Level (EQ5D-5L)

    Time frame: 90 days

    Health related quality of life assessment using EQ5D-5L. Each dimension has 5 levels ranging from no problems (1) to extreme problems (5), there is no overall score. It also has a visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging 0-100 with 0 being worst imaginable health state and 100 being best imaginable health state

  9. World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS)

    Time frame: 90 days

    WHODAS is a 12 point disability assessment with a raw score range of 0-48. 0 is no disability and 48 being full disability

  10. European Quality Of Life 5 Dimensions 5 Level (EQ5D-5L)

    Time frame: 180 days

    Health related quality of life assessment using EQ5D-5L. Each dimension has 5 levels ranging from no problems (1) to extreme problems (5), there is no overall score. It also has a visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging 0-100 with 0 being worst imaginable health state and 100 being best imaginable health state

  11. World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS)

    Time frame: 180 days

    WHODAS is a 12 point disability assessment with a raw score range of 0-48. 0 is no disability and 48 being full disability

  12. Cost per quality adjusted life year

    Time frame: 180 days

    Cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY)

  13. Cost per life year gained

    Time frame: 180 days

    Cost per life year gained (LYG)

  14. Frailty

    Time frame: 180 dyas

    Clinical frailty score

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre

Other

Collaborators

  • Baxter Healthcare Corporation

Registry information

Official study title

Intensive Nutrition Therapy Compared to Usual Care in Critically Ill Adults: A Randomised Pilot Trial

Acronym: INTENT

Important dates

Study start
2018
Primary completion
2023
Study completion
2023
First posted
Sep 25, 2017
Registry last updated
May 24, 2024

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.