Skip to content

Short-term outcomes of the Study of Refeeding to Optimize Inpatient Gains

One-paragraph summary

Multicentre inpatient RCT of 120 adolescents and young adults aged 12–24 with AN or atypical AN and at least 60% median BMI. Higher-calorie refeeding began at 2,000 kcal/day and increased 200 kcal/day; lower-calorie refeeding began at 1,400 kcal/day and increased 200 kcal every other day. Higher-calorie refeeding restored medical stability sooner without more protocol-defined safety events under close monitoring (Garber 2021, PMID 33074282).

Key findings

  • n=120 across two tertiary inpatient programs.
  • Inclusion of atypical AN broadens relevance beyond low BMI.
  • Higher-calorie arm: 2,000 kcal/day, +200 daily.
  • Lower-calorie arm: 1,400 kcal/day, +200 every other day.
  • Shorter time to medical stability and hospital stay in the higher-calorie arm.

What the trial did and did not establish (audit, 2026-09-02)

Two further papers from the same cohort complete the picture and were absent from the original note.

Report Question Result
Garber 2021, PMID 33074282 Short-term efficacy and safety Medical stability restored earlier (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.10–2.53; p=0.01); stay 4.0 days shorter (−6.1 to −1.9); $19,056 saved per participant; no excess electrolyte abnormalities or other adverse events
Golden 2021, PMID 33753542 1-year clinical remission and rehospitalization No group difference in remission over 12 months (p=0.42); rehospitalization 32.8% (19/58) vs 35.4% (17/48), p=0.84; days rehospitalized 6.0 vs 5.1, p=0.81
Garber 2024, PMID 38179719 Atypical AN subgroup and caloric dose Atypical AN (43% of 111) had slower heart-rate restoration (8.7±4.0 vs 6.5±3.9 days, p=0.008), less weight gain (3.1±5.9 vs 5.4±2.9 %mBMI, p<0.001) and more hypomagnesaemia (29% vs 11%, OR 3.29), explained by receiving 32.4±6.9 vs 43.4±9.8 kcal/kg

The correct summary is therefore narrower than "higher-calorie refeeding works": it restores stability faster and costs less, with equal safety and equal one-year outcomes, and its fixed kcal/day design systematically underfeeds heavier patients.

Limitations

  • Tertiary monitored settings with explicit electrolyte correction.
  • Participants were ≥60% median BMI; extreme malnutrition remains less certain.
  • A protocol package was compared, not calories isolated from monitoring.
  • Short-term stabilization is not durable recovery.

Why it matters

The trial directly challenged overly conservative routine refeeding for monitored adolescents and young adults while preserving a clear boundary against unsupervised extrapolation.

Cited by wiki pages

  • Refeeding and nutritional rehabilitation
  • Service models and setting
  • Red flags and safety concerns