Eating difficulties, assisted eating and nutritional status in elderly patients (> or 65 years) within rehabilitation
Department of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, P.O. Box 198, SE-221 00, Lund, Sweden. International Journal of Nursing Studies
(Impact Factor: 2.9).
04/2002; 39(3):341-51. DOI: 10.1016/S0020-7489(01)00025-6
This study describes frequencies and associations between eating difficulties, assisted eating and nutritional status in 520 elderly patients in hospital rehabilitation. Eating difficulties were observed during a meal and nutritional status was assessed with Subjective Global Assessment form. Eighty-two percent of patients had one or more eating difficulties, 36% had assisted eating and 46% malnutrition. Three components of eating were focused upon ingestion, deglutition, and energy (eating and intake). Deglutition and ingestion difficulties and low energy were associated with assisted eating, and low energy associated with malnutrition. Underestimation of low energy puts patients at risk of having or developing malnutrition.
Available from: Anna L Pilgrim
- "Mealtime assistance has been defined as the process of enabling a person to complete the eating process when a meal or snack is served in a care setting . This assistance can range from presentation of food in an available form and providing verbal encouragement, to cutting food into smaller pieces and transferring food from the plate to the person’s mouth. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
Malnutrition is common in older people in hospital and is associated with adverse clinical outcomes including increased mortality, morbidity and length of stay. This has raised concerns about the nutrition and diet of hospital in-patients. A number of factors may contribute to low dietary intakes in hospital, including acute illness and cognitive impairment among in-patients. The extent to which other factors influence intake such as a lack of help at mealtimes, for patients who require assistance with eating, is uncertain. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of using trained volunteer mealtime assistants to help patients on an acute medical ward for older people at mealtimes.
The study design is quasi-experimental with a before (year one) and after (year two) comparison of patients on the intervention ward and parallel comparison with patients on a control ward in the same department. The intervention in the second year was the provision of trained volunteer mealtime assistance to patients in the intervention ward. There were three components of data collection that were repeated in both years on both wards. The first (primary) outcome was patients’ dietary intake, collected as individual patient records and as ward-level balance data over 24 hour periods. The second was clinical outcome data assessed on admission and discharge from both wards, and 6 and 12 months after discharge. Finally qualitative data on the views and experience of patients, carers, staff and volunteers was collected through interviews and focus groups in both years to allow a mixed-method evaluation of the intervention.
The study will describe the effect of provision of trained volunteer mealtime assistants on the dietary intake of older medical in-patients. The association between dietary intake and clinical outcomes including malnutrition risk, body composition, grip strength, length of hospital stay and mortality will also be determined. An important component of the study is the use of qualitative approaches to determine the views of patients, relatives, staff and volunteers on nutrition in hospital and the impact of mealtime assistance.
Trial registered with ClinicalTrials.gov NCTO1647204
BMC Geriatrics 01/2013; 13(1):5. DOI:10.1186/1471-2318-13-5 · 1.68 Impact Factor
Available from: Peter Hagell
- "MEONF (additional file 1) was developed from the Minimal Eating Observation Form - Version II (MEOF-II) [16,17] and the criteria unintentional weight loss, either low BMI (< 20 for 69 years or younger, or < 22 for 70 years or older)  or calf circumference < 31 centimeters, and an additional assessment of the presence or absence of clinical signs of undernutrition . MEOF-II includes three components of eating. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The usefulness of the nutritional screening tool Minimal Eating Observation and Nutrition Form - Version II (MEONF-II) relative to Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002) remains untested. Here we attempted to fill this gap by testing the diagnostic performance and user-friendliness of the MEONF-II and the NRS 2002 in relation to the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) among hospital inpatients.
Eighty seven hospital inpatients were assessed for nutritional status with the 18-item MNA (considered as the gold standard), and screened with the NRS 2002 and the MEONF-II.
The MEONF-II sensitivity (0.61), specificity (0.79), and accuracy (0.68) were acceptable. The corresponding figures for NRS 2002 were 0.37, 0.82 and 0.55, respectively. MEONF-II and NRS 2002 took five minutes each to complete. Assessors considered MEONF-II instructions and items to be easy to understand and complete (96-99%), and the items to be relevant (87%). For NRS 2002, the corresponding figures were 75-93% and 79%, respectively.
The MEONF-II is an easy to use, relatively quick and sensitive screening tool to assess risk of undernutrition among hospital inpatients. With respect to user-friendliness and sensitivity the MEONF-II seems to perform better than the NRS 2002, although larger studies are needed for firm conclusions. The different scoring systems for undernutrition appear to identify overlapping but not identical patient groups. A potential limitation with the study is that the MNA was used as gold standard among patients younger than 65 years.
BMC Nursing 12/2011; 10(1):24. DOI:10.1186/1472-6955-10-24
Available from: Jenny Windahl
- "This protocol has been applied in a Swedish study and a principal component analysis showed that the instrument was comprised of three components: ingestion, deglutition and energy. This version of the instrument has not been tested for reliability (Westergren et al. 2002b). "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To examine eating difficulties among stroke patients - a comparison between women and men.
Gender differences have been reported in studies of stroke, but the findings are inconclusive and few of these studies have specifically focused on gender differences in eating difficulties.
This study was a descriptive, cross-sectional, comparative study.
Patients with stroke were recruited at a general hospital in Sweden. To detect eating difficulties, individual observations of the patients were made during one meal using a structured observation protocol. Assessment also included measurements of nutritional and oral status, degree of independence, stroke severity, neglect and well-being.
One hundred and four patients (53·8% women) were included in the study. The proportion of stroke patients with one or more eating difficulties was 81·7%. The most common eating difficulties were 'managing food on the plate' (66·3%), 'food consumption' (54·8%) and 'sitting position' (45·2%). Women had lower 'food consumption', more severe stroke (p = 0·003), worse functional status (p = 0·001) and lower quality of life (QoL) (p=0·038) than men. More women than men were malnourished and living alone. After adjustment for functional status and motor arm, the odds ratio of having difficulties with food consumption was four times higher among women than men (1·7-9·4, confidence interval 95%).
More women than men with stroke suffered from inadequate food consumption. The women had more severe strokes, experienced poorer QoL and showed lower functional status than the men. In the rehabilitation process of women with stroke, these factors should be taken into consideration.
Structured observation of meals, including assessment of food consumption, might be necessary in acute stroke care to detect patients, especially women, who might need closer supervision and nutritional intervention.
Journal of Clinical Nursing 09/2011; 20(17-18):2563-72. DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2011.03812.x · 1.26 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.