ライフサイエンスコーパス: nutrition support

1 mg/dl) in critically ill patients receiving nutrition support.

2 ve complications that result in the need for nutrition support.

3 lycemia in critically ill patients requiring nutrition support and is clearly safer.

4 ure to thrive, required prolonged parenteral nutrition support, and had high mortality.

5 itation, end-organ support, pain management, nutrition support, and wound care are all important aspe

6 ant unanswered questions about perioperative nutrition support are raised.

7 hazards than did those assigned to standard nutrition support care that provided energy at 55% of re

8 ve risks (RRs) of the outcomes of infection, nutrition support complications, other complications, an

9 d randomized literature concerning timing in nutrition support, discuss mechanisms of harm in feeding

10 The evidence for nutrition support during the perioperative period is rev

11 Severe malabsorption required parenteral nutrition support for longer than 1.5 years; this was co

12 eeded to determine the optimal postdischarge nutrition support for preterm infants.

13 sent a major population requiring parenteral nutrition support for survival.

14 Thus, nutrition support has become an important therapeutic ad

15 Use of these immunonutrients in nutrition support has become known as "immunonutrition."

16 The field of nutrition support has grown out of the belief that corre

17 as aids in restoring freedom from parenteral nutrition support; however, their long-term benefits, pr

18 ht that meeting estimated caloric needs with nutrition support improves outcomes in critically ill, o

19 ed formulas, restrictive diet, or parenteral nutrition support in CODE with poor enteral tolerance is

20 Nutrition support in obese hospitalized patients is cont

21 is better to err on the side of hypocaloric nutrition support in obese, diabetic patients rather tha

22 Compared to usual hospital nutrition without nutrition support, individualized nutritional support re

23 wed and recommendations are made about where nutrition support is most useful and where it may be cou

24 however, the optimal duration of hypocaloric nutrition support is not known.

25 PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Enteral nutrition support is often required in patients who are

26 Furthermore, response to nutrition support likely differs greatly at the level of

27 In critically ill patients, nutrition support may be a life-saving intervention, but

28 ong critically ill patients, the benefits of nutrition support may vary depending on severity of orga

29 feeding of premature infants, because their nutrition support must be designed to compensate for met

30 Total parenteral nutrition support of sham animals followed by endotoxin

31 ination of the CPGs improved other important nutrition support practices but was not associated with

32 status epilepticus were monitored regarding nutrition support provided according to the guidelines.

33 ffect of the immunonutrient or to the entire nutrition support regimen.

34 utrients have been added to standard enteral nutrition support solutions to create several commercial

35 ody composition of 2 different approaches of nutrition support: standard amounts of energy from PN (1

36 ded tube feeding and complex monitoring by a nutrition support team.

37 The median (range) nutrition support was for 51 (36 to 78) days, and overal

38 xis against bedrest-induced atrophy includes nutrition support with an emphasis on high-quality prote