Cited by 96Clinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyHip and Femur FracturesNutrition and Health in Aging

Insufficient fluid and energy intake in hospitalised patients with hip fracture. A prospective randomised study of 80 patients

ENEROTH, M, OLSSON, U, THORNGREN, K·2005·Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Aims Evaluate nutritional status and fluid and energy intake during the first ten days of hospitalisation in a selection of otherwise healthy patients with a hip fracture. Methods A prospective randomised controlled study of 80 patients. Nutritional status was assessed at inclusion. The energy and fluid intake was recorded and calculated daily whilst hospitalised. All patients were given ordinary hospital food and beverage. In the treatment group (n = 40) patients also received intraveneous supplementary nutrition (1000 kcal/day) for three days followed by oral supplementary nutrition (400 kcal/day) for seven days or until discharge. Results One third of patients were classified as malnourished in both groups. The average daily fluid intake/patient was 1300 ml in the control group compared to 1856 ml in the treatment group (P Conclusions Malnutrition is common even in a selection of healthy patients with hip fractures. During hospital stay the fluid and energy intake was considerably lower than that needed in the control group. Supplementary nutritional intake for ten days increased the total fluid and energy intake in the treatment group to near needed levels.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.clnu.2004.12.003

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • One RCT of low quality evaluated three days of perioperative peripheral parenteral nutrition followed by seven days of ONS compared with standard care in 80 patients with a fractured hip.

    “182) included one RCT of low quality that evaluated three days of perioperative peripheral PN followed by seven days of ONS compared with standard care in 80 patients with a fractured hip (184, 185).”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 41 · Cited by 96

Authors
ENEROTH, M., OLSSON, U., & THORNGREN, K.
Affiliations
Skåne University Hospital (SE)
Corresponding author
ENEROTH, M
Venue
Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-04
Volume
24
Issue
2
Pages
297-303
ISSN
0261-5614 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1999143536
Cited by
96
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 8
FWCI
6.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Clinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hip and Femur Fractures
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
Keywords
hip fracture, malnutrition, nutritional status, fluid intake, energy intake, supplementary nutrition, enteral nutrition, hospitalized patients
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Energy Intake, Drinking, Female, Hip Fractures, Hospitalization, Humans, Length of Stay, Male, Nutritional Requirements, Nutritional Status, Prospective Studies, Nutrition Assessment, Nutritional Support

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review