Julie Abayomi1, Allan Hackett. 1. Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK. j.c.abayoumi@livjm.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The existence of malnutrition in general hospitals is well documented. Psychiatric patients are known to have increased risk of malnutrition, yet physical examinations and nutritional assessments rarely take place in psychiatric hospitals. AIM: The purpose of this study was to adapt an established nutrition risk score for use with psychiatric patients, using criteria previously agreed by the care team, and to assess whether the clinical judgement of ward staff alone identified a similar group of patients to be at risk. METHOD: The risk score assessment was compared with a subjective risk assessment made by nursing staff as patients were admitted to the unit. Data were collected for 112 patients. RESULTS: The comparison revealed that nurses did not identify malnutrition in the same patients as the risk score, overlooking 27 (29%) at risk patients. Nurses associated malnutrition with psychotic illness, suggesting that depressed patients are more likely to be overlooked. STUDY LIMITATIONS: Although the risk score was based on a validated tool and its content and face validity were established, it has not itself been validated against criteria of nutritional status (malnutrition). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing routine nutritional screening on such units would assist in identifying at risk patients, enabling referral for dietetic intervention to be made. Providing nutrition education for staff might help to improve knowledge and awareness of malnutrition for this patient group.
BACKGROUND: The existence of malnutrition in general hospitals is well documented. Psychiatricpatients are known to have increased risk of malnutrition, yet physical examinations and nutritional assessments rarely take place in psychiatric hospitals. AIM: The purpose of this study was to adapt an established nutrition risk score for use with psychiatricpatients, using criteria previously agreed by the care team, and to assess whether the clinical judgement of ward staff alone identified a similar group of patients to be at risk. METHOD: The risk score assessment was compared with a subjective risk assessment made by nursing staff as patients were admitted to the unit. Data were collected for 112 patients. RESULTS: The comparison revealed that nurses did not identify malnutrition in the same patients as the risk score, overlooking 27 (29%) at risk patients. Nurses associated malnutrition with psychotic illness, suggesting that depressedpatients are more likely to be overlooked. STUDY LIMITATIONS: Although the risk score was based on a validated tool and its content and face validity were established, it has not itself been validated against criteria of nutritional status (malnutrition). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing routine nutritional screening on such units would assist in identifying at risk patients, enabling referral for dietetic intervention to be made. Providing nutrition education for staff might help to improve knowledge and awareness of malnutrition for this patient group.