| Literature DB >> 15111270 |
Shahrul A Noah1, Siti Norulhuda Abdullah, Suzana Shahar, Helmi Abdul-Hamid, Nurkahirizan Khairudin, Mohamed Yusoff, Rafidah Ghazali, Nooraini Mohd-Yusoff, Nik Shanita Shafii, Zaharah Abdul-Manaf.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Attempts in current health care practice to make health care more accessible, effective, and efficient through the use of information technology could include implementation of computer-based dietary menu generation. While several of such systems already exist, their focus is mainly to assist healthy individuals calculate their calorie intake and to help monitor the selection of menus based upon a prespecified calorie value. Although these prove to be helpful in some ways, they are not suitable for monitoring, planning, and managing patients' dietary needs and requirements. This paper presents a Web-based application that simulates the process of menu suggestions according to a standard practice employed by dietitians.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2004 PMID: 15111270 PMCID: PMC1550583 DOI: 10.2196/jmir.6.1.e4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Med Internet Res ISSN: 1438-8871 Impact factor: 5.428
Results of the information-needs survey of 52 dietitians
| Medical diagnosis | 4.80 ± 0.45 |
| Current body height and weight | 4.69 ± 0.65 |
| Nutrient requirement | 4.57 ± 0.88 |
| Biochemical values | 4.55 ± 0.86 |
| Dietary recall | 4.53 ± 0.86 |
| Weight | 4.18 ± 1.01 |
| Medical history | 4.14 ± 0.95 |
| Medication | 3.71 ± 1.15 |
| Allergy | 3.35 ± 1.32 |
| Supplement | 3.31 ± 1.24 |
* Frequency score: 1= least likely seek, 5=most likely seek.
† N = 50.
Results of the indicators for patient compliance survey
| Biochemical values | 51 | 4.69 ± 0.62 |
| Food intake change | 52 | 4.63 ± 0.60 |
| Compliance to diet regime | 52 | 4.62 ± 0.57 |
| Weight change | 51 | 4.61 ± 0.57 |
| Clinical parameters | 49 | 4.53 ± 0.65 |
| Changes of knowledge/behavior | 52 | 3.98 ± 1.09 |
| Physical activities | 50 | 3.76 ± 1.13 |
| Changes of medication | 50 | 3.14 ± 1.25 |
* Frequency score: 1=most frequent, 5=least frequent.
Figure 1The workflow of menu-suggestion activity, as determined by observing and interviewing dietitians in Malaysia. A solid line with single arrowhead refers to flow of menu-suggestion activity. A dotted line with double arrowhead refers to the process of recording information or moving a record to the respective forms or data repository. A dashed-plus-dotted line with single arrowhead refers to the process of retrieving previous/existing data
Figure 2The DietPal system architecture
Equations to predict Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR)
| 15-18 | 17.6W + 656 | 13.3W + 690 |
| 18-30 | 15.0W + 690 | 14.8W + 485 |
| 30-60 | 11.4W + 870 | 8.1W + 842 |
| > 60 | 11.7W + 585 | 9.0W + 656 |
* W = weight (kg)
Stress factor in clinical situation
| Starvation | 0.85 |
| Elective surgery | 1.05-1.15 |
| Sepsis | 1.20-1.40 |
| Head injury | 1.30 |
| Trauma | 1.40 |
| Inflammation | 1.50 |
| Burns | 2.0 |
Activity factor
| Bed bound immobile | 1.0-1.2 |
| Out of bed | 1.3-2.0 |
Quick method factor
| Sedentary | 20-25 kcal/kg weight | 30 kcal/kg weight | 35 kcal/kg weight |
| Moderate | 20-25 kcal/kg weight | 35 kcal/kg weight | 40 kcal/kg weight |
| Marked | 20-25 kcal/kg weight | 40 kcal/kg weight | 45 kcal/kg weight |
Contribution of macronutrients to total calories
| Carbohydrate | 55 |
| Protein | 15 |
| Fat | 30 |
* Default values provided by the system; derived from Malaysian Dietary Guidelines.
Figure 3An interface allowing dietitians to edit the contributions of macronutrients
Figure 4Exchange table by food group and by meal for 1600 kcal/day
Figure 5An example of menu/diet plan for 1600 kcal/day designed by using DietPal.
Cho refers to carbohydrate and Pro refers to protein
Figure 6Multiple levels of menus in DietPal
Results of the post evaluation among 10 dietitians from the National University of Malaysia Hospital
| 1. System usability | |||||||||||
| Personal data | 4 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 3.9 |
| Consultation | 3 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4.0 |
| Biochemical | 3 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 3.8 |
| Medical history | 3 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 3.6 |
| Family medical history | 4 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | - | 3.8 |
| Current medication | 4 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 3.8 |
| Dietary recall | 3 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 3.5 |
| Nutrient/Energy requirements | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 4.4 |
| Exchange table by foods | 4 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 4.3 |
| Exchange table by meals | 4 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4.1 |
| Menu suggestion | 2 | 5 | 2 | - | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 3.6 |
| 2. Organization of modules | 4 | 5 | 3 | - | 4 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 3.9 |
| 3. System efficiency | 3 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 3.9 |
| 4. System's accuracy | 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 3.7 |
| 5. Satisfy user's requirement | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4.2 |
* Ratings scale: 1 = strongly disagree/strongly dissatisfied; 2 = disagree/unsatisfied; 3 = average; 4 = satisfied/agree; 5 = strongly agree/strongly satisfied