Improvement of the nutritional support management system for patients in intensive care units

Table 1 Comparison of general data between the two groups

Groups	Proportion of males (%)	Proportion of females (%)	Age (yr)	APACHE II score (points)	NRS 2002 score (points)
Improvement group (n = 145)	64.14	35.86	63.68 ± 13.71	26.02 ± 10.23	4.57 ± 1.21
Control group (n = 136)	64.71	35.29	64.99 ± 13.45	25.85 ± 10.71	4.57 ± 1.30
P value	> 0.1	> 0.1	> 0.1	> 0.1	> 0.1

APACHE: Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation; NRS: Numeric Rating Scale.

Table 2 Comparative analysis of knowledge, attitudes/beliefs, and practices regarding nutritional support among medical staff in the Department of Critical Care Medicine before and after project implementation

Groups	Number of cases (n)	Knowledge	Attitudes/beliefs	Practices
Before project implementation	88.00	54.09 ± 19.45	45.37 ± 5.25	39.27 ± 7.60
After project implementation	83.00	94.57 ± 7.86	47.23 ± 4.07	44.45 ± 5.77
P value		< 0.01	< 0.05	< 0.01

Table 3 Comparative analysis of knowledge, attitudes/beliefs, and practices regarding psychological support among medical staff in the Department of Critical Care Medicine before and after project implementation

Groups	Number of cases (n)	Knowledge	Attitudes/beliefs	Practices
Before project implementation	88.00	9.50 ± 3.22	29.49 ± 4.74	8.17 ± 1.51
After project implementation	83.00	13.05 ± 2.27	37.17 ± 4.71	9.76 ± 1.58
P value		< 0.01	< 0.01	< 0.01

Table 4 Comparison of each nutritional support mode as a percentage of total effective hospital stay between the two groups

Groups	Total parenteral nutrition	Parenteral nutrition + enteral nutrition	Total enteral nutrition
Improvement group (n = 733)	261 (35.61%)	345 (47.07%)	84 (11.46%)
Control group (n = 789)	293 (37.14%)	337 (42.71%)	44 (5.58%)
P value	> 0.05	< 0.05	< 0.01

Table 5 Comparison of the enteral nutrition initiation rate within 48 h and compliance rate within 72 h after admission to the intensive care unit between the two groups

Groups	Enteral nutrition initiation rate within 48 h after ICU admission	Enteral nutrition compliance rate within 72 h after ICU admission
Improvement group (n = 145)	48.28% (66)	31.72% (n = 46)
Control group (n = 136)	37.50% (47)	20.59% (n = 28)
P value	< 0.05	< 0.05

ICU: Intensive care unit.

Table 6 Comparison of Self-rating Anxiety Scale and Self-rating Depression Scale scores between the two groups

Indicators	Improvement group (n = 145)	Control group (n = 136)	t value	P value
SAS (points, mean ± SD)	52.03 ± 9.02	61.07 ± 9.91	8.004	< 0.01
SDS (points, mean ± SD)	56.34 ± 9.83	62.47 ± 10.50	5.055	< 0.01

SAS: Self-rating Anxiety Scale; SDS: Self-rating Depression Scale.

Table 7 Comparison of intensive care unit length of stay between the two groups of patients

Indicators	Improvement group (n = 145)	Control group (n = 136)	t value	P value
Length of ICU stay	5.10 ± 2.12	5.76 ± 2.77	2.28	< 0.05

ICU: Intensive care unit.