Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Intensive Care Medicine 12/2019

01-12-2019 | Nutrition | Less is more in Intensive Care

Less is more in critical care is supported by evidence-based medicine

Authors: Catherine L. Auriemma, Greet Van den Berghe, Scott D. Halpern

Published in: Intensive Care Medicine | Issue 12/2019

Login to get access

Excerpt

The notion that “less is (or may be) more” in intensive care medicine has been contemplated by experts for decades. However, not until Kox and Pickkers’ review in 2013 had there been careful consideration of the evidence supporting this theory [1]. Their thought-provoking article focused specifically on sepsis, but the intervening years have yielded expanded evidence supporting this notion across many critical conditions. As healthcare systems seek to incentivize high-value care, transparency, and adherence to evidence-based practice guidelines, we must assess the strength of the evidence base regarding less is more. Here, we discuss recent randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that support the notion that even in intensive care units (ICUs), less intensive interventions may prove superior. …
Literature
11.
go back to reference Hébert PC, Wells G, Blajchman MA et al (1999) A multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial of transfusion requirements in critical care. Transfusion Requirements in Critical Care Investigators, Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. N Engl J Med 340:409–417CrossRef Hébert PC, Wells G, Blajchman MA et al (1999) A multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial of transfusion requirements in critical care. Transfusion Requirements in Critical Care Investigators, Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. N Engl J Med 340:409–417CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Lacroix J, Hébert PC, Hutchison JS et al (2007) Transfusion strategies for patients in pediatric intensive care units. N Engl J Med 356:1609–1619CrossRef Lacroix J, Hébert PC, Hutchison JS et al (2007) Transfusion strategies for patients in pediatric intensive care units. N Engl J Med 356:1609–1619CrossRef
20.
go back to reference National Heart Lung and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Clinical Trials Network, Rice TW, Wheeler AP et al (2012) Initial trophic vs full enteral feeding in patients with acute lung injury: the EDEN randomized trial. JAMA 307:795–803. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2012.137 CrossRef National Heart Lung and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Clinical Trials Network, Rice TW, Wheeler AP et al (2012) Initial trophic vs full enteral feeding in patients with acute lung injury: the EDEN randomized trial. JAMA 307:795–803. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1001/​jama.​2012.​137 CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Laffey JG, Kavanagh BP (2018) Negative trials in critical care: why most research is probably wrong. Lancet Respir Med 6:659–660CrossRef Laffey JG, Kavanagh BP (2018) Negative trials in critical care: why most research is probably wrong. Lancet Respir Med 6:659–660CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Less is more in critical care is supported by evidence-based medicine
Authors
Catherine L. Auriemma
Greet Van den Berghe
Scott D. Halpern
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords
Nutrition
Care
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine / Issue 12/2019
Print ISSN: 0342-4642
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1238
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-019-05771-2

Other articles of this Issue 12/2019

Intensive Care Medicine 12/2019 Go to the issue