4 resultados para 363.737
Resumo:
Comment on N Engl J Med. 2010 Jun 3;362(22):2077-91 author reply 988.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Prevalence of hyponutrition in hospitalized patients is very high and it has been shown to be an important prognostic factor. Most of admitted patients depend on hospital food to cover their nutritional demands being important to assess the factors influencing their intake, which may be modified in order to improve it and prevent the consequences of inadequate feeding. In previous works, it has been shown that one of the worst scored characteristics of dishes was the temperature. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of temperature on patient's satisfaction and amount eaten depending on whether the food was served in isothermal trolleys keeping proper food temperature or not. MATERIAL AND METHODS We carried out satisfaction surveys to hospitalized patients having regular diets, served with or without isothermal trolleys. The following data were gathered: age, gender, weight, number of visits, mobility, autonomy, amount of orally taken medication, intake of out-of-hospital foods, qualification of food temperature, presentation and smokiness, amount of food eaten, and reasons for not eating all the content of the tray. RESULTS Of the 363 surveys, 134 (37.96%) were done to patients with isothermal trays and 229 (62.04%) to patients without them. Sixty percent of the patients referred having eaten less than the normal amount within the last week, the most frequent reason being decreased appetite. During lunch and dinner, 69.3% and 67.7%, respectively, ate half or less of the tray content, the main reasons being as follows: lack of appetite (42% at lunch time and 40% at dinner), do not like the food (24.3 and 26.2%) or taste (15.3 and 16.8%). Other less common reasons were the odor, the amount of food, having nausea or vomiting, fatigue, and lack of autonomy. There were no significant differences in the amount eaten by gender, weight, number of visits, amount of medication, and level of physical activity. The food temperature was classified as adequate by 62% of the patients, the presentation by 95%, and smokiness by 85%. When comparing the patients served with or without isothermal trays, there were no differences with regards to baseline characteristics analyzed that might have had an influence on amount eaten. Ninety percent of the patients with isothermal trolley rated the food temperature as good, as compared with 57.2% of the patients with conventional trolley, the difference being statistically significant (P = 0.000). Besides, there were differences in the amount of food eaten between patients with and without isothermal trolley, so that 41% and 27.7% ate all the tray content, respectively, difference being statistically significant (P = 0.007). There were no differences in smokiness or presentation rating. CONCLUSIONS Most of the patients (60%) had decreased appetite during hospital admission. The percentage of hospitalized patients rating the food temperature as being good is higher among patients served with isothermal trolleys. The amount of food eaten by the patients served with isothermal trolleys is significantly higher that in those without them.
Resumo:
Endoscopic percutaneous gastrostomy is a safe technique although with potential complications before which the clinician has to be on alert in order to early detect them even after a long period of normal functioning. Most of them represent minor problems. Gastrocolocutaneous fistula is a rare but severe complication favored by some risk factors such as previous post-surgical adherences, deformities of the spine, or excessive gastric inflation at the time of performing the technique. We present the case of a patient with PEG with this complication that occurred after the first tube replacement. Our goal was in two senses: on the one hand, to analyze the preventive aspects and basic guidelines for a safe PEG placement to minimize the risks; on the other hand, to alert on the possible presence of this entity to prevent a progressive nutritional impairment. This complication ought to be included in the differential diagnosis of the diarrhea syndrome in the patient carrying a PEG. The diagnostic techniques of choice are radiologic tests such as CT scan and contrast media administration through the tube. Surgical therapy should be reserved to patients with acute peritonitis in order to perform a new gastrostomy.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND Obesity is positively associated with colorectal cancer. Recently, body size subtypes categorised by the prevalence of hyperinsulinaemia have been defined, and metabolically healthy overweight/obese individuals (without hyperinsulinaemia) have been suggested to be at lower risk of cardiovascular disease than their metabolically unhealthy (hyperinsulinaemic) overweight/obese counterparts. Whether similarly variable relationships exist for metabolically defined body size phenotypes and colorectal cancer risk is unknown. METHODS AND FINDINGS The association of metabolically defined body size phenotypes with colorectal cancer was investigated in a case-control study nested within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study. Metabolic health/body size phenotypes were defined according to hyperinsulinaemia status using serum concentrations of C-peptide, a marker of insulin secretion. A total of 737 incident colorectal cancer cases and 737 matched controls were divided into tertiles based on the distribution of C-peptide concentration amongst the control population, and participants were classified as metabolically healthy if below the first tertile of C-peptide and metabolically unhealthy if above the first tertile. These metabolic health definitions were then combined with body mass index (BMI) measurements to create four metabolic health/body size phenotype categories: (1) metabolically healthy/normal weight (BMI < 25 kg/m2), (2) metabolically healthy/overweight (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2), (3) metabolically unhealthy/normal weight (BMI < 25 kg/m2), and (4) metabolically unhealthy/overweight (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2). Additionally, in separate models, waist circumference measurements (using the International Diabetes Federation cut-points [≥80 cm for women and ≥94 cm for men]) were used (instead of BMI) to create the four metabolic health/body size phenotype categories. Statistical tests used in the analysis were all two-sided, and a p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. In multivariable-adjusted conditional logistic regression models with BMI used to define adiposity, compared with metabolically healthy/normal weight individuals, we observed a higher colorectal cancer risk among metabolically unhealthy/normal weight (odds ratio [OR] = 1.59, 95% CI 1.10-2.28) and metabolically unhealthy/overweight (OR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.01-1.94) participants, but not among metabolically healthy/overweight individuals (OR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.65-1.42). Among the overweight individuals, lower colorectal cancer risk was observed for metabolically healthy/overweight individuals compared with metabolically unhealthy/overweight individuals (OR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.49-0.96). These associations were generally consistent when waist circumference was used as the measure of adiposity. To our knowledge, there is no universally accepted clinical definition for using C-peptide level as an indication of hyperinsulinaemia. Therefore, a possible limitation of our analysis was that the classification of individuals as being hyperinsulinaemic-based on their C-peptide level-was arbitrary. However, when we used quartiles or the median of C-peptide, instead of tertiles, as the cut-point of hyperinsulinaemia, a similar pattern of associations was observed. CONCLUSIONS These results support the idea that individuals with the metabolically healthy/overweight phenotype (with normal insulin levels) are at lower colorectal cancer risk than those with hyperinsulinaemia. The combination of anthropometric measures with metabolic parameters, such as C-peptide, may be useful for defining strata of the population at greater risk of colorectal cancer.