Ebru Guney Şahin

Dr. Ebru Guney Şahin

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

12Years (2015-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
15 January 2025 in European Journal of Pediatrics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
NANihal Akçay
Nihal Akçay
DTDemet Tosun
Demet Tosun
IBIbrahim Bingöl
Ibrahim Bingöl
AÇAgop Çıtak
Agop Çıtak
SBSuleyman Bayraktar
Suleyman Bayraktar
CBCanan Baydemir
Canan Baydemir

6 July 2022 in Journal of Clinical Apheresis
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
FVFatih Varol
Fatih Varol
YCYasar Yusuf Can
Yasar Yusuf Can
Ebru Guney ŞahinEbru Guney Şahin
Ebru Guney Şahin
CDCANSU DURAK
CANSU DURAK
AKAziz Kilic
Aziz Kilic
TATugba Akin
Tugba Akin


15 January 2025 in Nutrients
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MCMerve Misirlioglu Celik
Merve Misirlioglu Celik
DYDincer Yildizdas
Dincer Yildizdas
FEFaruk Ekinci
Faruk Ekinci
NANihal Akçay
Nihal Akçay
IBIlyas Bingol
Ilyas Bingol
YCYasemin Coban
Yasemin Coban
Background: The inability to ensure adequate nutrition for patients, and failure to provide adequate calorie and protein intake, result in malnutrition, leading to increased morbidity and mortality. The present study assesses the two approaches to enteral nutrition—intermittent and continuous enteral feeding—in critically ill pediatric patients in Türkiye to determine the superiority of one method over the other. Methods: Included in this multicenter prospective study were patients receiving enteral nutrition via a tube who were followed up over a 3-month period. Anthropometric data, calorie and protein intake, and signs of feeding intolerance were evaluated in a comparison of the different feeding methods. Results: A total of 510 patients were examined. In the continuous enteral feeding (CEF) group, 20.2% of patients developed metabolic abnormalities, and 49.5% experienced enteral nutrition intolerance, both of which were higher than in the intermittent enteral feeding (IEF) group, and the differences were statistically significant. No significant differences were observed between the two feeding methods in terms of reaching the target calorie intake on days 2 and 7 (p > 0.05). On day 7, there were significant differences between the two feeding methods in terms of calorie and protein intake (p = 0.023 and 0.014, respectively). Conclusions: In the present study, assessing the IEF and CEF approaches to enteral nutrition, critically ill pediatric patients receiving intermittent feeding exhibited lower rates of enteral nutrition intolerance and metabolic abnormalities. Furthermore, the calorie and protein intake on day 7 were noted to be higher in the IEF group than in the CEF group. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the findings of the present study.


24 September 2022 in Journal of Clinical Apheresis
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
FVFatih Varol
Fatih Varol
YCYasar Yusuf Can
Yasar Yusuf Can
Ebru Guney ŞahinEbru Guney Şahin
Ebru Guney Şahin
SSSuleyman Berkay Sahin
Suleyman Berkay Sahin
GAGulcan Akyuz
Gulcan Akyuz
HCHalit Cam
Halit Cam