Critical Role of Nutrition in Improving Quality of Care: An Interdisciplinary Call to Action to Address Adult Hospital Malnutrition

The current era of health care delivery, with its focus on providing high-quality, affordable care, presents many challenges to hospital-based health professionals. The prevention and treatment of hospital malnutrition offers a tremendous opportunity to optimize the overall quality of patient care, improve clinical outcomes, and reduce costs. Unfortunately, malnutrition continues to go unrecognized and untreated in many hospitalized patients. This article represents a call to action from the interdisciplinary Alliance to Advance Patient Nutrition to highlight the critical role of nutrition intervention in clinical care and to suggest practical ways to promptly diagnose and treat malnourished patients and those at risk for malnutrition. We underscore the importance of an interdisciplinary approach to addressing malnutrition both in the hospital and in the acute post-hospital phase. It is well recognized that malnutrition is associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Although data vary across studies, available evidence shows that early nutrition intervention can reduce complication rates, length of hospital stay, readmission rates, mortality, and cost of care. The key is to systematically identify patients who are malnourished or at risk and to promptly intervene. We present a novel care model to drive improvement, emphasizing the following six principles: (1) create an institutional culture where all stakeholders value nutrition; (2) redefine clinicians' roles to include nutrition care; (3) recognize and diagnose all malnourished patients and those at risk; (4) rapidly implement comprehensive nutrition interventions and continued monitoring; (5) communicate nutrition care plans; and (6) develop a comprehensive discharge nutrition care and education plan.     

Comprehensive Care Improves Physical Recovery of Hip-Fractured Elderly Taiwanese Patients With Poor Nutritional Status

ObjectivesThe effects of nutritional management among other intervention components have not been examined for hip-fractured elderly persons with poor nutritional status. Accordingly, this study explored the intervention effects of an in-home program using a comprehensive care model that included a nutrition-management component on recovery of hip-fractured older persons with poor nutritional status at hospital discharge.DesignA secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial with 24-month follow-up.SettingA 3000-bed medical center in northern Taiwan.ParticipantsSubjects were included only if they had “poor nutritional status” at hospital discharge, including those at risk for malnutrition or malnourished. The subsample included 80 subjects with poor nutritional status in the comprehensive care group, 87 in the interdisciplinary care group, and 85 in the usual care group.InterventionsThe 3 care models were usual care, interdisciplinary care, and comprehensive care. Usual care provided no in-home care, interdisciplinary care provided 4 months of in-home rehabilitation, and comprehensive care included management of depressive symptoms, falls, and nutrition as well as 1 year of in-home rehabilitation.MeasurementsData were collected on nutritional status and physical functions, including range of motion, muscle power, proprioception, balance and functional independence, and analyzed using a generalized estimating equation approach. We also compared patients' baseline characteristics: demographic characteristics, type of surgery, comorbidities, length of hospital stay, cognitive function, and depression.ResultsPatients with poor nutritional status who received comprehensive care were 1.67 times (95% confidence interval 1.06–2.61) more likely to recover their nutritional status than those who received interdisciplinary and usual care. Furthermore, the comprehensive care model improved the functional independence and balance of patients who recovered their nutritional status over the first year following discharge, but not of those who had not yet recovered.ConclusionsAn in-home program using the comprehensive care model with a nutritional component effectively improved the nutritional status of hip-fractured patients with poor nutrition. This comprehensive care intervention more effectively improved recovery of functional independence and balance for patients with recovered nutritional status.     

A Comprehensive Nutrition‐Focused Quality Improvement Program Reduces 30‐Day Readmissions and Length of Stay in Hospitalized Patients

Background: Although screening patients for malnutrition risk on hospital admission is standard of care, nutrition shortfalls are undertreated. Nutrition interventions can improve outcomes. We tested effects of a nutrition‐focused quality improvement program (QIP) on hospital readmission and length of stay (LOS). Materials and Methods: QIP included malnutrition risk screening at admission, prompt initiation of oral nutrition supplements (ONS) for at‐risk patients, and nutrition support. A 2‐group, pre‐post design of malnourished adults with any diagnosis was conducted at 4 hospitals: QIP‐basic (QIPb) and QIP‐enhanced (QIPe). Comparator patients had a malnutrition diagnosis and ONS orders. For QIPb, nurses screened all patients on admission using an electronic medical record (EMR)–cued Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST); ONS was provided to patients with MST scores ≥2 within 24–48 hours. QIPe had ONS within 24 hours, postdischarge nutrition instructions, telephone calls, and ONS coupons. Primary outcome was 30‐day unplanned readmission. We used baseline (January 1–December 31, 2013) and validation cohorts (October 13, 2013–April 2, 2014) for comparison. Results: Patients (n = 1269) were enrolled in QIPb (n = 769) and QIPe (n = 500). Analysis included baseline (n = 4611) and validation (n = 1319) comparator patients. Compared with a 20% baseline readmission rate, post‐QIP relative reductions were 19.5% for all QIP, 18% for QIPb, and 22% for QIPe, respectively. Compared with a 22.1% validation readmission rate, relative reductions were 27.1%, 25.8%, and 29.4%, respectively. Similar reductions were noted for LOS. Conclusions: Thirty‐day readmissions and LOS were significantly lowered for malnourished inpatients by use of an EMR‐cued MST, prompt provision of ONS, patient/caregiver education, and sustained nutrition support.     

Association Between Malnutrition and Clinical Outcomes in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review

Malnutrition is associated with poor clinical outcomes among hospitalized patients. However, studies linking malnutrition with poor clinical outcomes in the intensive care unit (ICU) often have conflicting findings due in part to the inappropriate diagnosis of malnutrition. We primarily aimed to determine whether malnutrition diagnosed by validated nutrition assessment tools such as the Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) or Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) is independently associated with poorer clinical outcomes in the ICU and if the use of nutrition screening tools demonstrate a similar association. PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for eligible studies. Search terms included were synonyms of malnutrition, nutritional status, screening, assessment, and intensive care unit. Eligible studies were case‐control or cohort studies that recruited adults in the ICU; conducted the SGA, MNA, or used nutrition screening tools before or within 48 hours of ICU admission; and reported the prevalence of malnutrition and relevant clinical outcomes including mortality, length of stay (LOS), and incidence of infection (IOI). Twenty of 1168 studies were eligible. The prevalence of malnutrition ranged from 38% to 78%. Malnutrition diagnosed by nutrition assessments was independently associated with increased ICU LOS, ICU readmission, IOI, and the risk of hospital mortality. The SGA clearly had better predictive validity than the MNA. The association between malnutrition risk determined by nutrition screening was less consistent. Malnutrition is independently associated with poorer clinical outcomes in the ICU. Compared with nutrition assessment tools, the predictive validity of nutrition screening tools were less consistent.     

The presence of malnutrition in community‐living older adults receiving home nursing services

Aim: To determine the extent of malnutrition and malnutrition risk among community‐living older people (aged 65 years and over) who are receiving care from a metropolitan home nursing service in Victoria, Australia. Method: Over a 3‐month period (May–July 2009), 235 clients aged 65 years and over from a community nursing service providing home nursing care were assessed for malnutrition using the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA®, Nestle, Vevey, Switzerland). Results: Thirty‐four per cent (34.5%) of clients were identified as being at risk of malnutrition, while 8.1% were found to be malnourished. There was no significant relationship between nutrition risk and gender, country of birth or living arrangements. Conclusion: Malnutrition and nutrition risk was found to be an issue among this sample of community‐living older adults who were receiving home nursing care in Victoria, Australia. In this study, just over 40% of the participants were either at risk of malnutrition or malnourished, which highlights the vulnerability of this group of older people and the need for routine nutrition screening and a targeted intervention program to address nutrition issues.     

An evaluation of a community dietetics intervention on the management of malnutrition for healthcare professionals

Background: Healthcare professionals working in the community setting have limited knowledge of the evidence‐based management of malnutrition. The present study aimed to evaluate a community dietetics intervention, which included an education programme for healthcare professionals in conjunction with the introduction of a community dietetics service for patients ‘at risk’ of malnutrition. Changes in nutritional knowledge and the reported management of malnourished patients were investigated and the acceptability of the intervention was explored. Methods: An education programme, incorporating ‘Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST)’ training, was implemented in eight of 10 eligible primary care practices (14 general practitioners and nine practice nurses attended), in seven private nursing homes (20 staff nurses attended) and two health centres (53 community nurses attended) in conjunction with a community dietetics service for patients at risk of malnutrition. Nutritional knowledge was assessed before, immediately after, and 6 months after the intervention using self‐administered, multiple‐choice questionnaires. Reported changes in practice and the acceptability of the education programme were considered using self‐administered questionnaires 6 months after the intervention. Results: A significant increase in nutritional knowledge 6 months after the intervention was observed (P < 0.001). The management of malnutrition was reported to be improved, with 69% (38/55) of healthcare professionals reporting to weigh patients ‘more frequently’, whereas 80% (43/54) reported giving dietary advice to prevent or treat malnutrition. Eighty‐percent (44/55) of healthcare professionals stated that ‘MUST’ was an acceptable nutrition screening tool. Conclusion: An education programme supported by a community dietetics service for patients ‘at risk’ of malnutrition increased the nutritional knowledge and improved the reported management of malnourished patients in the community by healthcare professionals.     

Malnutrition identification,diagnosis and dietetic referrals: Are we doing a good enough job?

Aim: To determine the prevalence and diagnosis, documentation and referral rates for malnutrition among hospitalised patients and to ascertain potential shortfalls in financial reimbursement to a hospital as a result of malnutrition misdiagnosis. Methods: The Subjective Global Assessment tool was used to assess the nutritional status of 275 randomly selected inpatients on admission over a five‐week period across the acute care wards of a metropolitan tertiary teaching hospital. A retrospective audit of malnourished patients' medical histories was performed to assess diagnosis, documentation and dietetic referral rates for malnutrition. Where malnutrition was not included in the coding of an admission, that admission was hypothetically recoded to determine whether it changed the Diagnosis Related Group and subsequently the payment allocated for that admission. Results: Prevalence of malnutrition was 23%. Malnourished patients had significantly longer lengths of stay by 4.5 days compared with well‐nourished patients (P < 0.001). Only 15% of malnourished patients were correctly identified and documented as such in the medical histories. A dietitian was involved in 45% of malnutrition cases, but only documented 29% of such cases as malnourished. Forty‐eight of 53 (91%) audited cases did not have the corresponding malnutrition code included in their Diagnosis Related Group, resulting in a shortfall of AU$27 617 to the hospital in reimbursements, and AU$1 850 540 when extrapolated across the financial year. Conclusion: Malnutrition is highly prevalent in the acute hospital setting, yet remains poorly identified and formally documented. Many patients are not referred for dietetic intervention, thus compromising their clinical outcomes. Poor documentation of malnutrition can further result in financial shortfalls to the hospital.     

Malnutrition and Clinical Outcomes: The Case for Medical Nutrition Therapy

Malnutrition is not a new or a rare problem. In studies involving more than 1,327 hospitalized adult patients, 40% to 55% were found to be either malnourished or at risk for malnutrition, and up to 12% were severely malnourished. Surgical patients with likelihood of malnutrition are two to three times more likely to have minor and major complications as well as increased mortality; and their length of stay can be extended by 90% compared with the stay of well-nourished patients. Hospital charges are reported to be from 35% to 75% higher for malnourished patients than for well-nourished patients. Obtaining data to assess the nutritional status of patients is essential to optimal patient care, especially for patients at high risk for malnutrition. Nutrition assessment can be done with readily available and relatively inexpensive methods. But it is not enough to assess and identify malnutrition. Outcomes are improved and costs are saved only when appropriate intervention follows. This article identifies many well-conducted, published studies that support the findings that health outcomes of malnourished patients can be improved and that overall use of resources can be reduced by nutrition counseling, oral diet and oral supplements, enteral formula delivered via tube, and parenteral nutrition support via central or peripheral line. Early nutrition assessment and appropriate nutrition intervention must be accepted as essential for the delivery of quality health care. Appropriately selected nutrition support can address the problem of malnutrition, improve clinical outcomes, and help reduce the costs of health care. J Am Diet Assoc. 1996; 96:361-366,369.     

The facilitated early enteral and dietary management effectiveness trial in hospitalized patients with malnutrition

Background: The prevalence of malnutrition in the hospitalized setting is 30% to 55%. Previous studies reported an association of malnutrition with an increased hospital length of stay (LOS), morbidity, and mortality of patients. This study evaluated the role of early nutrition intervention on LOS, diagnosis coding of malnutrition cases, calculating case mix index, and reducing delays in implementing nutrition support to patients. Methods: Demographic data, anthropometric measurements, LOS, and serum albumin levels were collected from 400 patients in 2 medical wards to determine the prevalence of malnutrition and potential delays in nutrition consultation. Based on these results, a nutrition intervention study was conducted in 1 ward; the other ward served as a control. Patients were classified as normally nourished or malnourished. Multivariate general linear regressions were used to reveal the impact of intervention on the change in LOS, controlling for other potential confounding factors on the cohort and a subset with severe malnutrition. Results: Of the 400 patients assessed, 53% had malnutrition. Multiple general linear regressions showed that nutrition intervention reduced LOS an average of 1.93 days in the cohort group and 3.2 days in the severe malnourished group. Case mix index and female gender were positively associated with LOS in the malnourished group. Nutrition intervention reduced the delays in implementing nutrition support to patients by 47%. Conclusions: Results highlight the positive impact of nutrition intervention in terms of reduced LOS in malnourished hospital patients. Reduction in LOS with diagnosis coding of malnutrition cases yielded substantial economic benefits.     

Prevalence and documentation of malnutrition in hospitals: A case study in a large private hospital setting

Objectives: To determine the prevalence of malnutrition and whether the malnourished participants were being identified and documented as malnourished. To evaluate the impact of poor documentation on financial reimbursement to the hospital. Subjects: Three hundred and twenty‐four inpatients from a total of 690 randomly selected patients consented to participate in the study. Design and setting: Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) was used to assess the nutritional status of inpatients. There were 1906 patients were admitted over a three‐month period. Of these, 1860 were eligible and 690 were randomly selected from computer generated ward lists. The referral rate for nutrition intervention of malnourished participants was determined by viewing the patient medical records retrospectively. The Australian National Diagnostic Related Group (AN‐DRG) of the malnourished subjects, not documented in the medical record as malnourished, were redetermined with the addition of the malnutrition code. The potential shortfall in financial reimbursement to the hospital was calculated by subtracting the average costing based on original AN‐DRGs from the average costing based on the revised AN‐DRGs. Main outcome measures: Prevalence of malnutrition, levels of malnourished patients identified and documented, revenue losses under case payment system. Statistical analyses: Logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate group differences in sex across SGA categories and to investigate predictors of referral versus non referral. Analysis of variance was used to evaluate group differences in age across SGA categories. Results: One hundred and twenty‐seven (42.3%) of the 324 subjects were malnourished. Only one of 137 malnourished patients was documented as malnourished in the medical records and only 21 (15.3%) were referred for nutrition intervention. The inclusion of the malnutrition code to the AN‐DRG of the identified malnourished patients highlighted a shortfall of $125 311 in reimbursements to the hospital. Conclusions: The degree of malnutrition in this hospital is similar to that found internationally. Malnourished patients are not being identified using the current referral method. Failure to flag malnourished patients requiring nutrition intervention potentially impacts on length of stay, hospital costs and patient outcomes and ultimately results in a shortfall for case payment funded institutions.     

Tutorial: Development and Implementation of a Multidisciplinary Preoperative Nutrition Optimization Clinic

Although much is known about surgical risk, little evidence exists regarding how best to proactively address preoperative risk factors to improve surgical outcomes. Preoperative malnutrition is a widely prevalent and modifiable risk factor in patients undergoing surgery. Malnutrition prior to surgery portends significantly higher postoperative mortality, morbidity, length of stay, readmission rates, and hospital costs. Unfortunately, perioperative malnutrition is poorly screened for and remains largely unrecognized and undertreated—a true “silent epidemic” in surgical care. To better address this silent epidemic of surgical nutrition risk, here we describe the rationalization, development, and implementation of a multidisciplinary, registered dietitian–driven, preoperative nutrition optimization clinic program designed to improve perioperative outcomes and reduce cost. Implementation of this novel Perioperative Enhancement Team (POET) Nutrition Clinic required a collaboration among many disciplines, as well as an identified need for multidimensional scheduling template development, data tracking systems, dashboard development, and integration of electronic health records. A structured malnutrition risk score (Perioperative Nutrition Screen score) was developed and is being validated. A structured malnutrition pathway was developed and is under study. Finally, the POET Nutrition Clinic has established a novel role for a perioperative registered dietitian as the integral point person to deliver perioperative nutrition care. We hope this structured model of perioperative nutrition assessment and optimization will allow for wide implementation and generalizability in other centers worldwide to improve recognition and treatment of perioperative nutrition risk.     

Everyone's problem but nobody's job: Staff perceptions and explanations for poor nutritional intake in older medical patients

Aim: Up to 60% of older medical patients are malnourished with further decline during hospital stay. There is limited evidence for effective nutrition intervention. Staff focus groups were conducted to improve understanding of potential contextual and cultural barriers to feeding older adults in hospital. Methods: Three focus groups involved 22 staff working on the acute medical wards of a large tertiary teaching hospital. Staff disciplines were nursing, dietetics, speech pathology, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, pharmacy. A semistructured topic guide was used by the same facilitator to prompt discussions on hospital nutrition care including barriers. Focus groups were tape‐recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. Results: All staff recognised malnutrition to be an important problem in older patients during hospital stay and identified patient‐level barriers to nutrition care such as non‐compliance to feeding plans and hospital‐level barriers including nursing staff shortages. Differences between disciplines revealed a lack of a coordinated approach, including poor knowledge of nutrition care processes, poor interdisciplinary communication, and a lack of a sense of shared responsibility/coordinated approach to nutrition care. All staff talked about competing activities at meal times and felt disempowered to prioritise nutrition in the acute medical setting. Staff agreed education and ‘extra hands’ would address most barriers but did not consider organisational change. Conclusions: Redesigning the model of care to reprioritise meal‐time activities and redefine multidisciplinary roles and responsibilities would support coordinated nutrition care. However, effectiveness may also depend on hospital‐wide leadership and support to empower staff and increase accountability within a team‐led approach.     

Addressing Malnutrition in Hospitalized Adults

Established guidelines and standardized protocols exist to assist clinicians in effectively addressing disease‐related malnutrition in hospitalized adults. The goals of this treatment vary according to the disease state and the severity of the malnutrition. In starvation‐related malnutrition, the goal of nutrition therapy is to restore healthy levels of lean body mass and body fat. For chronic disease‐related malnutrition, the goals of treatment are to maintain and improve lean body mass and body fat. In acute‐disease‐related malnutrition, the goals of nutrition therapy are to support vital organ function and preserve the host response through the acute episode. The success of addressing malnutrition in hospitalized patients depends not just on the nutrition therapy selected, but also on the timely and appropriate application of guidelines and protocols by the clinicians dedicated to caring for malnourished patients. Coordination of nutrition care among providers is highly desirable, and usually includes a multidisciplinary team of clinicians typically comprising a physician, nurse, dietitian, and pharmacist. For greatest success, this attention to recognizing and addressing malnutrition begins at admission and continues beyond discharge to the community. When addressing malnutrition in hospitalized patients, oral feeding through diet enrichment or oral nutrition supplementation (ONS) is the first line of defense. ONS has consistently been demonstrated to provide nutrition, clinical, functional, and economic benefits to malnourished patients in both individual trials and meta‐analyses. In an era when the cost of healthcare is rising as the population ages, addressing malnutrition in hospitalized patients is an important priority.     

Evidence-Based Recommendations for Addressing Malnutrition in Health Care: An Updated Strategy From the feedM.E. Global Study Group

The prevalence of malnutrition ranges up to 50% among patients in hospitals worldwide, and disease-related malnutrition is all too common in long-term and other health care settings as well. Regrettably, the numbers have not improved over the past decade. The consequences of malnutrition are serious, including increased complications (pressure ulcers, infections, falls), longer hospital stays, more frequent readmissions, increased costs of care, and higher risk of mortality. Yet disease-related malnutrition still goes unrecognized and undertreated. To help improve nutrition care around the world, the feedM.E. (Medical Education) Global Study Group, including members from Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and North and South America, defines a Nutrition Care Pathway that is simple and can be tailored for use in varied health care settings. The Pathway recommends screen, intervene, and supervene: screen patients' nutrition status on admission or initiation of care, intervene promptly when needed, and supervene or follow-up routinely with adjustment and reinforcement of nutrition care plans. This article is a call-to-action for health caregivers worldwide to increase attention to nutrition care.     

Characteristics and Outcomes of Adult Inpatients With Malnutrition

Background

The diagnosis of malnutrition remains controversial. Furthermore, it is unknown if physician diagnosis of malnutrition impacts outcomes. We sought to compare outcomes of patients with physician diagnosed malnutrition to patients recognized as malnourished by registered dietitians (RDs), but not physicians, and to describe the impact of each of 6 criteria on the diagnosis of malnutrition.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients identified as meeting criteria for malnutrition. Pediatric, psychiatric, maternity, and rehabilitation patients were excluded. Patient demographics, clinical data, malnutrition type and criteria, nutrition interventions, and outcomes were abstracted from the electronic medical record.

Results

RDs identified malnutrition for 291 admissions during our study period. This represents 4.1% of hospital discharges. Physicians only diagnosed malnutrition on 93 (32%) of these cases. Physicians diagnosed malnutrition in 43% of patients with a body mass index <18.5 but only 26% of patients with body mass index higher than 18.5. Patients with a physician diagnosis had a longer length of stay (mean 14.9 days vs 7.1 days) and were more likely to receive parenteral nutrition (PN) (20.4% vs 4.6%). Of the patients, 62% had malnutrition due to chronic illness. Of the 6 criteria used to identify malnourished patients, weight loss and reduced energy intake were the most common.

Conclusions

Malnutrition is underrecognized by physicians. However, further research is needed to determine if physician recognition and treatment of malnutrition can improve outcomes. The most important criteria for identifying malnourished patients in our cohort were weight loss and reduced energy intake.     

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of early screening and treatment of malnourished patients

BACKGROUND: About 25-40% of hospital patients are malnourished. With current clinical practices, only 50% of malnourished patients are identified by the medical and nursing staff. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to report the cost and effectiveness of early recognition and treatment of malnourished hospital patients with the use of the Short Nutritional Assessment Questionnaire (SNAQ). DESIGN: The intervention group consisted of 297 patients who were admitted to 2 mixed medical and surgical wards and who received both malnutrition screening at admission and standardized nutritional care. The control group consisted of a comparable group of 291 patients who received the usual hospital clinical care. Outcome measures were weight change, use of supplemental drinks, use of tube feeding, use of parenteral nutrition and in-between meals, number of consultations by the hospital dietitian, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: The recognition of malnutrition improved from 50% to 80% with the use of the SNAQ malnutrition screening tool during admission to the hospital. The standardized nutritional care protocol added approximately 600 kcal and 12 g protein to the daily intake of malnourished patients. Early screening and treatment of malnourished patients reduced the length of hospital stay in malnourished patients with low handgrip strength (ie, frail patients). To shorten the mean length of hospital stay by 1 d for all malnourished patients, a mean investment of 76 euros (91 US dollars) in nutritional screening and treatment was needed. The incremental costs were comparably low in the whole group and in the subgroup of malnourished patients with low handgrip strength. CONCLUSIONS: Screening with the SNAQ and early standardized nutritional care improves the recognition of malnourished patients and provides the opportunity to start treatment at an early stage of hospitalization. The additional costs of early nutritional care are low, especially in frail malnourished patients.     

Hospital malnutrition: prevalence, identification and impact on patients and the healthcare system

Malnutrition is a debilitating and highly prevalent condition in the acute hospital setting, with Australian and international studies reporting rates of approximately 40%. Malnutrition is associated with many adverse outcomes including depression of the immune system, impaired wound healing, muscle wasting, longer lengths of hospital stay, higher treatment costs and increased mortality. Referral rates for dietetic assessment and treatment of malnourished patients have proven to be suboptimal, thereby increasing the likelihood of developing such aforementioned complications. Nutrition risk screening using a validated tool is a simple technique to rapidly identify patients at risk of malnutrition, and provides a basis for prompt dietetic referrals. In Australia, nutrition screening upon hospital admission is not mandatory, which is of concern knowing that malnutrition remains under-reported and often poorly documented. Unidentified malnutrition not only heightens the risk of adverse complications for patients, but can potentially result in foregone reimbursements to the hospital through casemix-based funding schemes. It is strongly recommended that mandatory nutrition screening be widely adopted in line with published best-practice guidelines to effectively target and reduce the incidence of hospital malnutrition.     

Addressing Disease‐Related Malnutrition in Healthcare

Alarmingly high rates of disease‐related malnutrition have persisted in hospitals of both emerging and industrialized nations over the past 2 decades, despite marked advances in medical care over this same interval. In Latin American hospitals, the numbers are particularly striking; disease‐related malnutrition has been reported in nearly 50% of adult patients in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Puerto Rico, Venezuela, and Uruguay. The tolls of disease‐related malnutrition are high in both human and financial terms—increased infectious complications, higher incidence of pressure ulcers, longer hospital stays, more frequent readmissions, greater costs of care, and increased risk of death. In an effort to draw attention to malnutrition in Latin American healthcare, a feedM.E. Latin American Study Group was formed to extend the reach and support the educational efforts of the feedM.E. Global Study Group. In this article, the feedM.E. Latin American Study Group shows that malnutrition incurs excessive costs to the healthcare systems, and the study group also presents evidence of how appropriate nutrition care can improve patients' clinical outcomes and lower healthcare costs. To achieve the benefits of nutrition for health throughout Latin America, the article presents feedM.E.'s simple and effective Nutrition Care Pathway in English and Spanish as a way to facilitate its use.     

Malnutrition screening and early nutrition intervention in hospitalised patients in acute aged care: A randomised controlled trial

Objectives

High rates of malnutrition have been reported in the older hospitalized patient population. This is recognised to impact on patient outcomes and health costs. This study aimed to assess the impact of nutrition screening and intervention on these parameters.

Design

Randomised controlled prospective study.

Setting

The study was performed in the acute geriatric medicine wards of the Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney Australia.

Participants

All patients admitted to these wards under a geriatrician with an expected length of stay of at least 72 hours were considered for the study.

Intervention

Patients were screened on admission for malnutrition using the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) tool and randomly assigned to control or intervention groups. Intervention patients were immediately commenced on a malnutrition care plan (MCP). Control patients were only commenced on a MCP if referred by clinical staff.

Measurements

Length of stay (LOS), weight change and frequency of readmission to hospital were compared between the groups.

Results

143 patients were screened. 119 were identified as malnourished (MN) or at risk of malnutrition (AR). Overall LOS was not different between the two groups (control v. intervention: 13.4 ± 1.3 days v. 12.5 ± 1.2 days, p=0.64). However there was a significant decrease in LOS in the MN (control v. intervention: 19.5 ± 3days v. 10.6 ± 1.6 days, p=0.013) and a trend to reduced readmissions. There was no difference in weight change over admission between the groups. Without screening, clinical staff identified only a small proportion of malnourished patients (35% of MN and 20% of AR).

Conclusions

Malnutrition in the older hospital population is common. Malnutrition screening on hospital admission facilitated targeted nutrition intervention, however length of stay and representations were only reduced in older malnourished patients with an MNA score less than 17.