Preimplementation of malnutrition screening in the context of outpatient memory care: A quality improvement project.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Austin M Sullivan, Jeffrey M Burns, Debra K Sullivan, Matthew K Taylor, Diego R Mazzotti, Heather D Gibbs
{"title":"Preimplementation of malnutrition screening in the context of outpatient memory care: A quality improvement project.","authors":"Austin M Sullivan, Jeffrey M Burns, Debra K Sullivan, Matthew K Taylor, Diego R Mazzotti, Heather D Gibbs","doi":"10.1002/ncp.70050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Older adults with dementia are at heightened risk of malnutrition, but nutrition screening is an uncommon practice in this population. This study aimed to determine the feasibility of malnutrition screening and to determine nutrition risk prevalence in an outpatient memory care clinic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This quality improvement project used the eight-item Seniors in the Community: Risk Evaluation for Eating and Nutrition screener to determine nutrition risk. The Organizational Readiness to Change Assessment (ORCA) determined providers' views on readiness for change.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the 12-week trial, 15.3% of eligible memory care clinic patients were screened. Of these, 58.3% (n = 123) had high nutrition risk. Lack of staffing was the most significant barrier to completion of nutrition screening. Clinic staff responses on the ORCA indicated moderate agreement that screening among persons with dementia is evidence based (mean = 3.7 of 5; SD = 0.26) and strong agreement for evidence of organizational support (mean = 4.12 of 5; SD = 0.38). A majority of patients and/or caregivers reported nutrition screening was easy (n = 79 of 211) or extremely easy (n = 44 of 211). A total of 69 patients (33.7%) who completed the screener indicated interest in a nutrition consultation. The most common barriers to nutrition services reported by caregivers and/or patients were difficulty accessing the clinic and unwillingness to use nutrition services.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study detected barriers and facilitators to administering nutrition screening in a memory care clinic. These preliminary findings suggest further efforts to implement nutrition screening in outpatient memory care clinics are warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":19354,"journal":{"name":"Nutrition in Clinical Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nutrition in Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ncp.70050","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Older adults with dementia are at heightened risk of malnutrition, but nutrition screening is an uncommon practice in this population. This study aimed to determine the feasibility of malnutrition screening and to determine nutrition risk prevalence in an outpatient memory care clinic.

Methods: This quality improvement project used the eight-item Seniors in the Community: Risk Evaluation for Eating and Nutrition screener to determine nutrition risk. The Organizational Readiness to Change Assessment (ORCA) determined providers' views on readiness for change.

Results: During the 12-week trial, 15.3% of eligible memory care clinic patients were screened. Of these, 58.3% (n = 123) had high nutrition risk. Lack of staffing was the most significant barrier to completion of nutrition screening. Clinic staff responses on the ORCA indicated moderate agreement that screening among persons with dementia is evidence based (mean = 3.7 of 5; SD = 0.26) and strong agreement for evidence of organizational support (mean = 4.12 of 5; SD = 0.38). A majority of patients and/or caregivers reported nutrition screening was easy (n = 79 of 211) or extremely easy (n = 44 of 211). A total of 69 patients (33.7%) who completed the screener indicated interest in a nutrition consultation. The most common barriers to nutrition services reported by caregivers and/or patients were difficulty accessing the clinic and unwillingness to use nutrition services.

Conclusions: This study detected barriers and facilitators to administering nutrition screening in a memory care clinic. These preliminary findings suggest further efforts to implement nutrition screening in outpatient memory care clinics are warranted.

在门诊记忆护理的背景下实施营养不良筛查:一个质量改进项目。
背景:老年痴呆患者营养不良的风险较高,但营养筛查在这一人群中并不常见。本研究旨在确定营养不良筛查的可行性,并确定门诊记忆保健诊所的营养风险患病率。方法:本质量改进项目采用《社区老年人饮食与营养风险评价》八项筛查法确定营养风险。组织变革准备评估(ORCA)确定了提供者对变革准备的看法。结果:在12周的试验中,筛选了15.3%的符合条件的记忆护理临床患者。其中58.3% (n = 123)有高营养风险。缺乏人员是完成营养筛查的最大障碍。临床工作人员对ORCA的反应表明,中度同意痴呆症患者的筛查是基于证据的(平均值= 3.7 / 5;SD = 0.26),强烈同意组织支持的证据(平均值= 4.12 / 5;SD = 0.38)。大多数患者和/或护理人员报告营养筛查很容易(211人中有79人)或非常容易(211人中有44人)。完成筛查的69名患者(33.7%)表示有兴趣进行营养咨询。护理人员和/或患者报告的最常见的营养服务障碍是难以进入诊所和不愿使用营养服务。结论:本研究发现了在记忆保健诊所进行营养筛查的障碍和促进因素。这些初步研究结果表明,在门诊记忆保健诊所进一步努力实施营养筛查是有必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
9.70%
发文量
128
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: NCP is a peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary publication that publishes articles about the scientific basis and clinical application of nutrition and nutrition support. NCP contains comprehensive reviews, clinical research, case observations, and other types of papers written by experts in the field of nutrition and health care practitioners involved in the delivery of specialized nutrition support. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信