↓ Skip to main content

An investigation into the nutritional status of patients receiving an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol versus standard care following Oesophagectomy

Overview of attention for article published in Supportive Care in Cancer, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
An investigation into the nutritional status of patients receiving an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol versus standard care following Oesophagectomy
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00520-017-4038-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katie Benton, Iain Thomson, Elisabeth Isenring, B. Mark Smithers, Ekta Agarwal

Abstract

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols have been effectively expanded to various surgical specialities including oesophagectomy. Despite nutrition being a key component, actual nutrition outcomes and specific guidelines are lacking. This cohort comparison study aims to compare nutritional status and adherence during implementation of a standardised post-operative nutritional support protocol, as part of ERAS, compared to those who received usual care. Two groups of patients undergoing resection of oesophageal cancer were studied. Group 1 (n = 17) underwent oesophagectomy between Oct 2014 and Nov 2016 during implementation of an ERAS protocol. Patients in group 2 (n = 16) underwent oesophagectomy between Jan 2011 and Dec 2012 prior to the implementation of ERAS. Demographic, nutritional status, dietary intake and adherence data were collected. Ordinal data was analysed using independent t tests, and categorical data using chi-square tests. There was no significant difference in nutrition status, dietary intake or length of stay following implementation of an ERAS protocol. Malnutrition remained prevalent in both groups at day 42 post surgery (n = 10, 83% usual care; and n = 9, 60% ERAS). A significant difference was demonstrated in adherence with earlier initiation of oral free fluids (p <0.008), transition to soft diet (p <0.004) and continuation of jejunostomy feeds on discharge (p <0.000) for the ERAS group. A standardised post-operative nutrition protocol, within an ERAS framework, results in earlier transition to oral intake; however, malnutrition remains prevalent post surgery. Further large-scale studies are warranted to examine individualised decision-making regarding nutrition support within an ERAS protocol.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 18%
Student > Master 7 14%
Other 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 14 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 18 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 January 2018.
All research outputs
#15,489,831
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#3,146
of 4,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,062
of 441,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#63
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,643 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 441,261 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.