Background
Nutrition guidelines recommend enteral nutrition in the form of gastric feedings for critically ill children and acknowledge a lack of evidence describing an optimal method for providing these feedings.
Objective
To determine the state of the science regarding the efficacy of bolus (intermittent) or continuous gastric feedings to improve nutrition delivery in critically ill children receiving mechanical ventilation.
Methods
Five hundred seventy-nine abstracts met the inclusion criteria and were screened by 2 reviewers according to prespecified criteria. Full-text reviews were performed on 28 articles; 11 studies were selected for detailed analysis. Because of the small number of eligible studies, broader searches were conducted.
Results
Only 5 studies with a collective enrollment of fewer than 200 children closely addressed the specific research question. These 5 studies did not report any similarity in feeding regimens, nor did they report nutritional outcomes. Two of the articles described findings from the same study population. Although 4 of the 5 studies randomized children to bolus versus continuous feedings, only 3 studies described attainment of nutrient delivery goals in both the intervention and the control groups; the remaining study did not report this outcome. The heterogeneity in methodology and outcomes among the 5 studies did not allow for a meta-analysis.
Conclusions
The dearth of evidence regarding best practices and outcomes related to bolus versus continuous gastric feedings in critically ill children receiving mechanical ventilation requires additional rigorous investigation.
The falsely elevated serum creatinine levels due to nitromethane ingestion can lead to unnecessary therapeutic interventions. We intend to heighten awareness of this potential misstep by reporting this case.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.