Skip to main content
. 2017 May 19;2017(5):CD011598. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011598.pub2

Zhu 2012a.

Methods Randomised clinical trial, China
Participants 97 hospitalised adults admitted with stroke, at nutritional risk due to stroke
Male:Female = 56:41
Mean age = 72 years
Exclusion criteria: None
Interventions Experimental group 1: Received both enteral and parenteral supplements.The energy was 84 ‐ 105 kj/kg/day, and increased to the target volume 126 ‐ 147 kj/kg/day, based on participant's recovery condition. Whole protein supplements (6.3 kJ/ml) were given through nasogastric tube, and the sugar, fat and protein were provided through vein tube.(n = 33)
Experimental group 2: Received only enteral supplements. The energy was 84 ‐ 105 kj/kg/day, and increased to the target volume 126 ‐ 147 kj/kg/day based on participant's recovery condition. All the nutrition was provided through the nasogastric tube. (n = 32)
Control group: The nutrition (6.3 kJ/ml)was given through nasogastric tube under the control of a specialist nurse(n = 32)
Outcomes Triceps skinfold thickness, arm muscle circumference, haemoglobin, albumin, prealbumin, triglyceride, incidence rate of malnutrition; infection rate, mortality, NIHSS, Barthel Index
Study dates Not stated
Notes Same as Zhu 2012b, but with experimental group 1 vs control group. We found no contact information for the authors.
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Not described
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Not described
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes High risk The participants and personnel were not blinded.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk Not described
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk The number of participants with incomplete data was not reported.
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk No protocol could be obtained but the trial did report on all‐cause mortality and serious adverse events.
For‐profit bias Unclear risk It was unclear how the trial was funded.
Other bias Low risk The trial appeared to be free of other components that could put it at risk of bias.