Skip to main content
. 2009 Apr 15;2009(2):CD003288. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003288.pub3

Edington 2004.

Methods Method of randomisation: envelope prepared by statistician‐ allocation concealment: A 
 Assessor blinding: not reported 
 Intention to treat: for some outcomes 
 Lost to follow‐up: 42 withdrawn (unclear which arm) 
 Timing of intervention: 8 weeks from baseline visit within 7 days after discharge from hospital 
 Length of follow‐up: 6 months
Participants Location: North Staffordshire Hospital NHS trust, Hammersmith NHS Trust and Newcastle upon Tyne Hospital NHS Trust (4 Hospitals) 
 100 patients 
 Inclusion criteria: female elderly malnourished patients newly discharged from hospital, aged 65 years or older, BMI<20, or <25 with documented evidence of weight loss of at least 10% of body weight in the last 6 months prior to the study period or 5% of more in the last 3 months prior to the study period. Score of 7 or more on the abbreviated mental test. 
 Exclusion criteria: Incapable of taking supplements to provide a minimum of 600 kcal/day, not able to be weighed standing, intolerant of any of the ingredients in the study supplements, history of diabetes, hyperglycaemia or chronic renal failure, requiring Parenteral Nutrition or Enteral feeds as a sole source of nutrition or had been prescribed supplements during the last week of their hospital stay. Informed consent. 
 Sex: 55 female, 25 male
Interventions a: The choice of one or more nutritional supplements: Ensure Plus tetrapak, Enlive tetrapak, Formance pudding or Ensure Bar, Abbott Laboratories Ltd. Supplements 600‐1000 kcal aim to increase to ideal body weight 0.5kg/ week based on Schofield equations 
 b: Routine care 
 Allocated: 51/49 
 Assessed: 32/26 (weight)
Outcomes Main outcomes: mortality 
 Functional status ‐ Handgrip, health related quality of life, requirement for health and social care services, health care costs 
 Additional outcomes: Anthropometric indices ‐ weight change, %AMC change, dietary intake change
Notes Classified as malnourished, unwell, acute admission and in the community 
 Commercial trial
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Allocation concealment? Low risk A ‐ Adequate