BMC Nutrition · 2017 · 25 citations · 39 references
AgricultureNutritionNutritional SciencesClinical NutritionHealth Services ResearchHuman NutritionMedical Nutrition TherapyNutrition AssessmentNutrition Status EvaluationNutrition SupportNutritional AssessmentNutritional SupportAcute Care PathwaysClinical Nutrition Outcome AssessmentNutrition Care Outcome AssessmentNutrition Needs AssessmentNutrition Program ImplementationNutrition-related ScreeningNutritional Status ScreeningPatient Needs Assessment
BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is common in hospitalized patients and is associated with increased mortality, length of stay, and risk of re-admission. The consensus based Integrated Nutrition Pathway for Acute Care (INPAC) was developed and validated to enhance patients' nutrition care and improve clinical outcomes. As part of the More-2-Eat project (M2E), five hospitals implemented INPAC activities (e.g. screening) in a single medical unit. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the care gaps with respect to INPAC activities on these five units prior to implementation. Results were used as part of a needs assessment on each unit, demonstrating where nutrition care could be improved and tailoring of implementation was required. METHODS: Cross-sectional data was collected by site research associates (RAs) using a standardized audit form once per week for 4 weeks. The audit contents were based on the INPAC algorithm. All medical charts of patients on the study unit on the day of the audit were reviewed to track routine nutrition care activities (e.g. screening). Data was descriptively displayed with REDCap™ and analyzed using R Studio software. RESULTS: Less than half of patients (249/700, 36%) were screened for malnutrition at admission. Of those screened, 36% (89/246) were at risk for malnutrition yet 36% (32/89) of these patients did not receive a dietitian assessment. Also, 21% (33/157) of patients who were not screened at risk were assessed. At least one barrier to food intake was noted in 85% of patient medical charts, with pain, constipation, nausea or vomiting being the most common. Many of these barriers were addressed through INPAC standard nutrition care strategies that removed the barrier (e.g. 41% were provided medication for nausea). Advanced nutrition care strategies to improve intake were less frequently recorded (39% of patients). CONCLUSION: These results highlight the current state of nutrition care and areas for improvement regarding INPAC activities, including nutrition screening, assessment, and standard and advanced nutrition care strategies to promote food intake. The results also provided baseline data to support buy-in for INPAC implementation in each M2E study unit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered ClinTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800304, June 7, 2016.
39
Paul A. Harris, Robert Taylor, Robert J. Thielke et al. · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · 2008 · 51.7K citations · Full text
Laura J. Damschroder, David C. Aron, Rosalind E. Keith et al. · Implementation Science · 2009 · 14.8K citations · Full text
Public Health, Health Services Administration, Health Services Research +15
What is subjective global assessment of nutritional status?
AS Detsky, McLaughlin, JP Baker et al. · Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 1987 · 3.2K citations
Agriculture, Nutrition, Surgery +16
Prognostic impact of disease-related malnutrition
Kristina Norman, Claude Pichard, Herbert Lochs et al. · Clinical Nutrition · 2007 · 1.5K citations