Comparison of three interventions in the treatment of malnutrition in hospitalised older adults: A clinical trial

Katrina L. Campbell, Lindsey Webb, Angela Vivanti, Paul Varghese, Maree Ferguson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aim The objective of the present study was to determine the most effective method for providing oral nutrition support to hospitalised older adult patients with malnutrition using clinical and patient-centred measures. Methods The present study involved consecutive assignment of 98 inpatients assessed as malnourished ( Subjective Global Assessment B or C) to conventional commercial supplements (traditional, n = 33), Med Pass (n = 32, 2 cal/mL supplement delivered 60 mL four times a day at medication rounds) or mid-meal trolley (n = 33, selective snack trolley offered between meals) for two weeks. Weight change, supplement compliance, energy and protein intake (3-day food records), quality of life ( EQ- 5D), patient satisfaction and cost were evaluated. Results Weight change was similar across the three interventions (mean ± SD): 0.4 ± 3.8% traditional; 1.5 ± 5.8% Med Pass; 1.0 ± 3.1% mid-meal ( P = 0.53). Energy and protein intakes (% of requirements) were more often achieved with traditional (107 ± 26, 128 ± 35%) and Med Pass (110 ± 28, 126 ± 38%) compared with mid-meal (85 ± 25, 88 ± 25%) interventions ( P = < 0.01). Overall quality-of-life ratings (scale 0-100) improved significantly with Med Pass (mean change, 12.4 ± 20.9) and mid-meal (21.1 ± 19.7) interventions, however, did not change with traditional intervention (1.5 ± 18.1) ( P = 0.05). Patient satisfaction including sensory qualities (taste, look, temperature, size) and perceived benefit (improved health and recovery) was rated highest for mid-meal trolley (all P < 0.05). Conclusions Patients achieved recommended intake with supplements ( Med Pass or traditional), and despite lower cost, higher satisfaction and quality of life with selective mid-meal trolley did not achieve recommended energy and protein intake. Future research is warranted for implementing a combination of strategies in providing oral nutrition support.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)325-331
Number of pages7
JournalNutrition and Dietetics
Volume70
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Malnutrition
Meals
Clinical Trials
Energy Intake
Quality of Life
Patient Satisfaction
Therapeutics
Weights and Measures
Costs and Cost Analysis
Food Quality
Snacks
Proteins
Insurance Benefits
Compliance
Inpatients
Temperature

Cite this

Campbell, Katrina L. ; Webb, Lindsey ; Vivanti, Angela ; Varghese, Paul ; Ferguson, Maree. / Comparison of three interventions in the treatment of malnutrition in hospitalised older adults : A clinical trial. In: Nutrition and Dietetics. 2013 ; Vol. 70, No. 4. pp. 325-331.
@article{b01bc3484d9e431ea3fbe56d8f25b015,
title = "Comparison of three interventions in the treatment of malnutrition in hospitalised older adults: A clinical trial",
abstract = "Aim The objective of the present study was to determine the most effective method for providing oral nutrition support to hospitalised older adult patients with malnutrition using clinical and patient-centred measures. Methods The present study involved consecutive assignment of 98 inpatients assessed as malnourished ( Subjective Global Assessment B or C) to conventional commercial supplements (traditional, n = 33), Med Pass (n = 32, 2 cal/mL supplement delivered 60 mL four times a day at medication rounds) or mid-meal trolley (n = 33, selective snack trolley offered between meals) for two weeks. Weight change, supplement compliance, energy and protein intake (3-day food records), quality of life ( EQ- 5D), patient satisfaction and cost were evaluated. Results Weight change was similar across the three interventions (mean ± SD): 0.4 ± 3.8{\%} traditional; 1.5 ± 5.8{\%} Med Pass; 1.0 ± 3.1{\%} mid-meal ( P = 0.53). Energy and protein intakes ({\%} of requirements) were more often achieved with traditional (107 ± 26, 128 ± 35{\%}) and Med Pass (110 ± 28, 126 ± 38{\%}) compared with mid-meal (85 ± 25, 88 ± 25{\%}) interventions ( P = < 0.01). Overall quality-of-life ratings (scale 0-100) improved significantly with Med Pass (mean change, 12.4 ± 20.9) and mid-meal (21.1 ± 19.7) interventions, however, did not change with traditional intervention (1.5 ± 18.1) ( P = 0.05). Patient satisfaction including sensory qualities (taste, look, temperature, size) and perceived benefit (improved health and recovery) was rated highest for mid-meal trolley (all P < 0.05). Conclusions Patients achieved recommended intake with supplements ( Med Pass or traditional), and despite lower cost, higher satisfaction and quality of life with selective mid-meal trolley did not achieve recommended energy and protein intake. Future research is warranted for implementing a combination of strategies in providing oral nutrition support.",
author = "Campbell, {Katrina L.} and Lindsey Webb and Angela Vivanti and Paul Varghese and Maree Ferguson",
year = "2013",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/1747-0080.12008",
language = "English",
volume = "70",
pages = "325--331",
journal = "Nutrition and Dietetics",
issn = "1032-1322",
publisher = "Wiley-Academy",
number = "4",

}

Comparison of three interventions in the treatment of malnutrition in hospitalised older adults : A clinical trial. / Campbell, Katrina L.; Webb, Lindsey; Vivanti, Angela; Varghese, Paul; Ferguson, Maree.

In: Nutrition and Dietetics, Vol. 70, No. 4, 01.12.2013, p. 325-331.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of three interventions in the treatment of malnutrition in hospitalised older adults

T2 - A clinical trial

AU - Campbell, Katrina L.

AU - Webb, Lindsey

AU - Vivanti, Angela

AU - Varghese, Paul

AU - Ferguson, Maree

PY - 2013/12/1

Y1 - 2013/12/1

N2 - Aim The objective of the present study was to determine the most effective method for providing oral nutrition support to hospitalised older adult patients with malnutrition using clinical and patient-centred measures. Methods The present study involved consecutive assignment of 98 inpatients assessed as malnourished ( Subjective Global Assessment B or C) to conventional commercial supplements (traditional, n = 33), Med Pass (n = 32, 2 cal/mL supplement delivered 60 mL four times a day at medication rounds) or mid-meal trolley (n = 33, selective snack trolley offered between meals) for two weeks. Weight change, supplement compliance, energy and protein intake (3-day food records), quality of life ( EQ- 5D), patient satisfaction and cost were evaluated. Results Weight change was similar across the three interventions (mean ± SD): 0.4 ± 3.8% traditional; 1.5 ± 5.8% Med Pass; 1.0 ± 3.1% mid-meal ( P = 0.53). Energy and protein intakes (% of requirements) were more often achieved with traditional (107 ± 26, 128 ± 35%) and Med Pass (110 ± 28, 126 ± 38%) compared with mid-meal (85 ± 25, 88 ± 25%) interventions ( P = < 0.01). Overall quality-of-life ratings (scale 0-100) improved significantly with Med Pass (mean change, 12.4 ± 20.9) and mid-meal (21.1 ± 19.7) interventions, however, did not change with traditional intervention (1.5 ± 18.1) ( P = 0.05). Patient satisfaction including sensory qualities (taste, look, temperature, size) and perceived benefit (improved health and recovery) was rated highest for mid-meal trolley (all P < 0.05). Conclusions Patients achieved recommended intake with supplements ( Med Pass or traditional), and despite lower cost, higher satisfaction and quality of life with selective mid-meal trolley did not achieve recommended energy and protein intake. Future research is warranted for implementing a combination of strategies in providing oral nutrition support.

AB - Aim The objective of the present study was to determine the most effective method for providing oral nutrition support to hospitalised older adult patients with malnutrition using clinical and patient-centred measures. Methods The present study involved consecutive assignment of 98 inpatients assessed as malnourished ( Subjective Global Assessment B or C) to conventional commercial supplements (traditional, n = 33), Med Pass (n = 32, 2 cal/mL supplement delivered 60 mL four times a day at medication rounds) or mid-meal trolley (n = 33, selective snack trolley offered between meals) for two weeks. Weight change, supplement compliance, energy and protein intake (3-day food records), quality of life ( EQ- 5D), patient satisfaction and cost were evaluated. Results Weight change was similar across the three interventions (mean ± SD): 0.4 ± 3.8% traditional; 1.5 ± 5.8% Med Pass; 1.0 ± 3.1% mid-meal ( P = 0.53). Energy and protein intakes (% of requirements) were more often achieved with traditional (107 ± 26, 128 ± 35%) and Med Pass (110 ± 28, 126 ± 38%) compared with mid-meal (85 ± 25, 88 ± 25%) interventions ( P = < 0.01). Overall quality-of-life ratings (scale 0-100) improved significantly with Med Pass (mean change, 12.4 ± 20.9) and mid-meal (21.1 ± 19.7) interventions, however, did not change with traditional intervention (1.5 ± 18.1) ( P = 0.05). Patient satisfaction including sensory qualities (taste, look, temperature, size) and perceived benefit (improved health and recovery) was rated highest for mid-meal trolley (all P < 0.05). Conclusions Patients achieved recommended intake with supplements ( Med Pass or traditional), and despite lower cost, higher satisfaction and quality of life with selective mid-meal trolley did not achieve recommended energy and protein intake. Future research is warranted for implementing a combination of strategies in providing oral nutrition support.

U2 - 10.1111/1747-0080.12008

DO - 10.1111/1747-0080.12008

M3 - Article

VL - 70

SP - 325

EP - 331

JO - Nutrition and Dietetics

JF - Nutrition and Dietetics

SN - 1032-1322

IS - 4

ER -