Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 298

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A randomised controlled trial evaluating the use of enteral nutritional supplements postoperatively in malnourished surgical patients

Open access
Beattie, A H, Prach, A T, Baxter, J P, Pennington, C R·2000·Gut

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients who undergo surgery are at risk of malnutrition due to periods of starvation, the stress of surgery, and subsequent increase in metabolic rate. There are limited data on nutritional outcome of surgical patients. AIMS: To investigate changes in nutritional status and the influence of oral supplements on nutritional status, morbidity, and quality of life in postoperative surgical patients. METHODS: Entry was determined by the presence of malnutrition, as defined by a body mass index (BMI) ⩽20 kg/m 2, anthropometric measurements ⩽15th percentile on admission, or initiation of oral diet postoperatively and/or a weight loss of 5% or more during the operative period. We studied 101 patients: 52 were randomised to the treatment group (TG) and prescribed a 1.5 kcal/ml nutritional supplement; 49 patients were randomised to the control group (CG) and continued with routine nutritional management. Nutritional status was assessed by weight, anthropometry, and grip strength, with measurements taken at two weekly intervals for 10 weeks. Complications, namely wound infection, chest infection, and antibiotic use were documented. Quality of life (QOL) was assessed using the UK SF-36 questionnaire. RESULTS: Patients in the control group lost a maximum mean (SD) of 5.96 (4.21) kg in weight over a period of eight weeks while patients in group TG lost less weight overall (maximum mean (SD) 3.40 (0.89) kg (p<0.001) occurring at four weeks and progressively regained weight from week 4). Anthropometry, grip strength, and QOL were similarly significantly different between groups (p<0.001). Fewer patients in the treatment group (7/52) required antibiotic prescriptions compared with the control group (15/49). CONCLUSIONS: Nutritional status declined for two months after discharge. Postoperative nutritional supplementation improved nutritional status, QOL, and morbidity in these patients.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/gut.46.6.813

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 298

Metadata

Authors
Beattie, A. H., Prach, A. T., Baxter, J. P., & Pennington, C. R.
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2000-06-01
Volume
46
Issue
6
Pages
813-818
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2168326373
Cited by
298
References
0
FWCI
9.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A randomised controlled trial evaluating the use of enteral nutritional supplements postoperatively in malnourished surgical patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gut.46.6.813
The paper
Beattie, A. H., Prach, A. T., Baxter, J. P., & Pennington, C. R. (2000). A randomised controlled trial evaluating the use of enteral nutritional supplements postoperatively in malnourished surgical patients. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.46.6.813

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.