Introduction: In the present study, we decided to compare the effectiveness and economic efficiency of ensure, standard entrameal feeding and standard hospital gavage in trauma patients admitted. Material and Methods: In this double-blind clinical trial, 66 patients were randomly divided into three completely equal groups. Total protein level, arm circumference (MAC), and electrolyte levels were measured and the nutritional score and cost of each group were calculated. Results: The mean age of the three groups of ensure, standard entrameal feeding and hospital gavage were 35.05 (8.46), 34.05 (8.32) and 35.95 (11.55), respectively. The studied groups in terms of age, sex, sodium, potassium, magnesium and calcium were not significantly different. Total protein and MAC were not significantly different in the two groups of ensure, standard entrameal feeding (P = 0.998). A decreasing trend in NUTRIC Score was observed in all three groups, the most significant decrease was related to the anchor group, followed by intramylastic standard and hospital gavage (P <0.0001). In NUTRIC Score was observed in all three groups, where the most significant decrease was related to the ensure group, followed by standard entrameal feeding and hospital gavage (P <0.0001). Conclusion: The standard entrameal feeding was the same as ensure in terms of total protein and MAC, but imposes more complications and costs on the patient. Hospital gavage is not a good nutrition to provide patient’s energy and protein.
Keywords: Gavage, intensive care unit, nutrition