Next Article in Journal
Potential Complementary Effect of Zinc and Alkalihalobacillus clausii on Gut Health and Immunity: A Narrative Review
Next Article in Special Issue
Hypophosphatemia after Start of Medical Nutrition Therapy Indicates Early Refeeding Syndrome and Increased Electrolyte Requirements in Critically Ill Patients but Has No Impact on Short-Term Survival
Previous Article in Journal
Persistent Barriers of the Gluten-Free Basic Food Basket: Availability, Cost, and Nutritional Composition Assessment
Previous Article in Special Issue
An Evaluation of the Usefulness of Selected Screening Methods in Assessing the Risk of Malnutrition in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Nutritional and Morphofunctional Assessment of Post-ICU Patients with COVID-19 at Hospital Discharge: NutriEcoMuscle Study

Nutrients 2024, 16(6), 886; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16060886
by Clara Joaquín 1,*,†, Irene Bretón 2,†, María Julia Ocón Bretón 3, Rosa Burgos 4, Diego Bellido 5, Pilar Matía-Martín 6,7,8, Miguel Ángel Martínez Olmos 9,10,11, Ana Zugasti 12, María Riestra 13, Francisco Botella 14 and José M. García Almeida 15,16,17
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Nutrients 2024, 16(6), 886; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16060886
Submission received: 19 February 2024 / Revised: 7 March 2024 / Accepted: 11 March 2024 / Published: 19 March 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Malnutrition in Hospitalized Patients)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors

Thank you for the opportunity to review this paper. The study presented the weight loss and malnutrition of  COVID patients depending on the hospitalization duration, and the severity of the disease.

The paper is well prepared and the authors used multiple and complex tools to estimate the nutrition status of the patients.

The methodology of the study is very detailed written.

The results of the study are very carefully analysed.

Please find minor comments below:

Line 83 US measurement is the abbreviation of... please write

Line 181 I think is more suitable for writing the selected sample, not the entire population (there are only 96 patients)

Line 201 Characteristics of the sample (not of the population)

Discussion

Maybe another limitation of the study was the use of different BIA devices to assess the body composition.

Kind regards

Author Response

We thank the editor and the reviewers for the effort and time put into the review of our manuscript. We have appreciated very much your constructive comments. Responses to the reviewer and changes in the revised manuscript are as follows.

1- Line 83 US measurement is the abbreviation of... please write

Ultrasound (US).   The word has been included in the mansucript. 

2- Line 181 I think is more suitable for writing the selected sample, not the entire population (there are only 96 patients)

Following the reviewer’s suggestion, the sentence has been modified.

3-Line 201 Characteristics of the sample (not of the population)Ti

Title of table 1 has been modified as suggested.

4- Discussion: Maybe another limitation of the study was the use of different BIA devices to assess the body composition

We agree with the referee that a limitation of our study was the use of different BIA devices to assess the body composition, depending on the hospital where the test was performed.  To minimize bias the total body water, necessary for estimating Fat-Free Mass (FFM), was calculated only by using the 50-kHz impedance. A sentence explaining this limitation has been included in the manuscript. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors provided results of the NutriEcoMuscle study of COVID-19 patients, which showed that patients were discharged with varying degrees of malnutrition and muscle loss, and lost independence was also noted. The authors also explored ultrasound technology for assessment of body composition. This is a well-conducted study and I have only minor text corrections that I’ve listed in the comments of the attached pdf.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We would like to thank the reviewer the thoughtful and thorough review as well as the positive comments on the manuscript.

Following the reviewer’s suggestion, grammatical changes in lines 147 and 363 have been performed. 

 

Back to TopTop