Bromatologic study of artisanal formulae and a proposal of ambulatory protocol of nutritional enteral care: DOI: 10.15343/0104-7809.20094467479
Enteral nutrition (EN) is an important therapeutic tool for individuals with complete gastrointestinal treatment, but able to ingestnutrients in adequate amount and/or quality. Thus, its formulas must follow nutritional recommendations and have its cost and chemical compositionidentified. The implem...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2009 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Centro Universitário São Camilo |
| Repositorio: | O Mundo da Saúde (Online) |
| Idioma: | portugués |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs3.revistamundodasaude.emnuvens.com.br:article/664 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistamundodasaude.emnuvens.com.br/mundodasaude/article/view/664 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Alimentos formulados. Análise de alimentos. Nutrição enteral. Formulated foods. Food analysis. Enteral nutrition. |
| Sumario: | Enteral nutrition (EN) is an important therapeutic tool for individuals with complete gastrointestinal treatment, but able to ingestnutrients in adequate amount and/or quality. Thus, its formulas must follow nutritional recommendations and have its cost and chemical compositionidentified. The implementation of a care protocol guarantees EN qualification. The study aims to determine cost and chemical composition of4 formularizations (F1 - F4) comparing them with F5 and F6 published by Araújo; Menezes (2005) and to propose a protocol for nutritional careof this population. The analyzed formularizations are composed by in natura industrial foods, and are evaluated as regards cost and nutritionalcomposition through bromatologic laboratorial techniques for determination of the centesimal composition and Prosky et al. (1988) as concernsstaple fibers. The protocol was based on the literature and current legislation. F1 was less expensive without reaching lipidic recommendations;F2 had low proteic and caloric values and F3 reached nutritional values, but is more expensive. F4 reached recommended nutritional values (0.8Kcal/ml; 15% protein, 23% of lipids and 62% of carbohydrates) with reduced cost (R$331,20/month), higher only than F1’s. F1 presented 7,2 gof TP (Total Fiber content) (47.2% insoluble content (FI) and 52.8% soluble content (FS)); F2: 2.4g of FT (83.3% FI and 16.7% FS); F3: 7.6 g ofFT (52.6% FI and 47.4% FS) and F4: 5.6g of FT (89.3% FI and 10.7% FS), confirming the inadequacy of staple fibers in these diets. The protocolcombines nutritional variables (nutritional evaluation, food anamneses) and clinic (diagnostic, pharmacotherapy, examinations) regardingadequacy of individualized nutritional care (type, volume, administration of the formula). The best cost / benefit relation was that of F4, reachingnutritional balance, being an alternative for home feeding for individuals lacking income. The results of staple fibers ratify the necessity of itssupplementation when EN is exclusive. The protocol favors: register, control and evaluation of EN effectiveness. |
|---|