Nutritional approach outcomes in palliative care patients with malnutrition
Le résumé fourni par la source
Aims: In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of dietary patterns on activity and performance scores, symptom levels, laboratory parameters, anthropometric measurements and mortality in palliative care patients with high malnutrition risk score. Methods: The effects of enteral and parenteral feeding methods, which are the predominant feeding methods, on admission-discharge laboratory parameters, performance scales, activity indices, anthropometric measurements, symptom scales, infection status, duration of antibiotic use and mortality were evaluated in 103 patients aged 18 years and older who were hospitalized in the Palliative Care Service. Results: When evaluated on the scales, it was seen that enteral fed patients had better initial scores than parenteral fed patients. There was no difference between the nutrition groups in the mean length of stay in the Palliative Care Service and the frequency of infection, whereas the duration of antibiotic use was longer, transfer to the intensive care unit (74% vs. 12%, p<0.05) and mortality rates (13% vs. 4%, p<0.05) were significantly higher in the parenterally fed group. Conclusion: The data from this study showed that in palliative care patients with malnutrition, patients with lower activity and performance scores required more parenteral nutrition and that the need for parenteral nutrition, edema and poor performance at baseline were independent predictors of mortality.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Nutritional approach outcomes in palliative care patients with malnutrition
- Date Crossref
- 12/02/2026
- Éditeur
- MediHealth Academy
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.