Position of the American Dietetic Association: Liberalization of the diet prescription improves quality of life for older adults in long-term care.

Western Home Communities, Cedar Falls, IA, USA.
Journal of the American Dietetic Association (Impact Factor: 3.92). 01/2006; 105(12):1955-65.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT It is the position of the American Dietetic Association (ADA) that the quality of life and nutritional status of older residents in long-term care facilities may be enhanced by liberalization of the diet prescription. The Association advocates the use of qualified dietetics professionals to assess and evaluate the need for medical nutrition therapy according to each person's individual medical condition, needs, desires, and rights. In 2003, ADA designated aging as its second "emerging" area. Nutrition care in long-term settings must meet two goals: maintenance of health and promotion of quality of life. The Nutrition Care Process includes assessment of nutritional status through development of an individualized nutrition intervention plan. Medical nutrition therapy must balance medical needs and individual desires and maintain quality of life. The recent paradigm shift from restrictive institutions to vibrant communities for older adults requires dietetics professionals to be open-minded when assessing risks vs benefits of therapeutic diets, especially for frail older adults. Food is an essential component of quality of life; an unacceptable or unpalatable diet can lead to poor food and fluid intake, resulting in weight loss and undernutrition and a spiral of negative health effects. Facilities are adopting new attitudes toward providing care. "Person-centered" or "resident-centered care" involves residents in decisions about schedules, menus, and dining locations. Allowing residents to participate in diet-related decisions can provide nutrient needs, allow alterations contingent on medical conditions, and simultaneously increase the desire to eat and enjoyment of food, thus decreasing the risks of weight loss, undernutrition, and other potential negative effects of poor nutrition and hydration.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Unintentional weight loss is a health risk for residents of aged care facilities, a concern for families and places demands on nursing staff. An existing weight loss framework to assess and manage residents' weight developed by a multidisciplinary team was implemented and evaluated with nurses and residents in aged care facilities within an area health service of Sydney, Australia. Thematic analysis generated seven binary concepts relating to relational, procedural, behavioural, physical, psychological, environmental and temporal aspects of feeding assistance provided by nurses to residents. Theoretical sampling was applied to the literature confirming those concepts which were organized as a model of feeding assistance labelled the Focus on Feeding! Decision Model.Nurses can play a pivotal role in the assessment of feeding difficulty and implementation of innovative mealtime programs. The Model aims to promote nurses' critical thinking and decision-making to improve nutritional intake of residents and avoid preventable weight loss.
    International Journal of Nursing Practice 05/2014; DOI:10.1111/ijn.12260 · 0.54 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background. This work was constructed in order to assess the nutritional and functional status in hospitalized elderly and to study the associations between them and sociodemographic variables. Methods. 200 elderly patients (>65 years old) admitted to Internal Medicine and Neurology Departments in nonemergency conditions were included. Comprehensive geriatric assessments, including nutritional and functional assessments, were done according to nutritional checklist and Barthel index, respectively. Information was gathered from the patients, from the ward nurse responsible for the patient, and from family members who were reviewed. Results. According to the nutritional checklist, 56% of participants were at high risk, 18% were at moderate risk of malnutrition, and 26% had good nutrition. There was a high nutritional risk in patients with low income and good nutrition in patients with moderate income. Also, there was a high nutritional risk in rural residents (61.9%) in comparison with urban residents (25%). Barthel index score was significantly lower in those at high risk of malnutrition compared to those at moderate risk and those with good nutrition. Conclusions. Hospitalized elderly are exposed to malnutrition, and malnourished hospitalized patients are candidates for functional impairment. Significant associations are noticed between both nutritional and functional status and specific sociodemographic variables.
    Journal of aging research 10/2013; 2013:101725. DOI:10.1155/2013/101725
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A systematic review of the literature was conducted to review and evaluate the evidence supporting a liberalized diet for the management of diabetes mellitus in aged care homes and examine the effect of this on glycaemia, nutritional status and diabetes comorbidity risk factors. A 3 step search of eight databases followed by independent data extraction and quality assessment by two authors was undertaken. Studies which compared therapeutic diets to a liberalized diet or observation studies reviewing the effects of therapeutic diets on glycaemia and nutritional status were included. Of the 546 studies identified, six met the inclusion criteria. Methodological quality of the studies was rated poor and the majority concluded no statistically significant change in diabetes management outcomes with a liberalized diet, but modest increases in glycaemia were observed. Inadequate data was available to determine effects of diet change on nutritional status or diabetes risk factors. Overall studies were in support of a liberalized diet but due to the low quality of the evidence and a lack of significant findings it may not be appropriate to extrapolate these conclusions to inform dietetic practice.
    Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice 01/2015; 108(1). DOI:10.1016/j.diabres.2014.12.021 · 2.54 Impact Factor