Why the study?
Malnutrition worsens prognosis in chronic heart failure and pharmacological therapy alone is incomplete, prompting investigation into whether nutritional advice and supplementation can improve nutritional status.
Does structured nutritional advice combined with nutritional supplements improve nutritional status in patients with chronic heart failure?
Does structured nutritional advice combined with nutritional supplements improve nutritional status in patients with chronic heart failure?
A 12-week intervention of structured nutritional advice and supplements significantly improves short- and medium-term nutritional status in patients with chronic heart failure, though it did not significantly reduce 1-year mortality or length of stay.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports nutritional advice plus supplements in chronic HF; extends RCT evidence on nutritional status while mortality impact remains open.
INTRODUCTION: Introduction: malnutrition is commonly associated with, and worsens the prognosis of heart failure. The management of chronic heart failure and its complications based only on the application of pharmacologic guidelines is incomplete. The benefits of interventions to improve nutritional status may be limited by the multifactorial nature of malnutrition. The objective of the present study was to determine whether nutritional advice and nutritional supplementation can improve the nutritional status of patients with chronic heart failure. Methods: we performed a randomized clinical trial on an intention-to-treat basis with blinded observers. We divided a sample of 76 patients into 2 groups: one that received structured advice combined with nutritional supplements for 12 weeks (test group), and one that received treatment as usual (control group). The outcome measure was nutritional status as evaluated using the Subjective Global Assessment and the Mini Nutritional Assessment tools. After 12 weeks of treatment the test group received a leaflet that served as a reminder. No further interventions were applied in either group. Patients were followed for 1 year. Results: at 3 months of follow-up nutritional status improved 4-fold in the test group, whereas no change was observed in the control group. At 9 months nutritional status in the intervention group had improved 2-fold with respect to the baseline visit, whereas no differences were recorded in the control group. Differences in mortality and length of stay at 1 year did not reach statistical significance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Guerra-Sánchez et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: