| Literature DB >> 16457707 |
Karin O Lassen1, Jens Olsen, Edvin Grinderslev, Filip Kruse, Merete Bjerrum.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The inspiration for the present assessment of the nutritional care of medical patients is puzzlement about the divide that exists between the theoretical knowledge about the importance of the diet for ill persons, and the common failure to incorporate nutritional aspects in the treatment and care of the patients. The purpose is to clarify existing problems in the nutritional care of Danish medical inpatients, to elucidate how the nutritional care for these inpatients can be improved, and to analyse the costs of this improvement.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2006 PMID: 16457707 PMCID: PMC1420282 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-6-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Health Serv Res ISSN: 1472-6963 Impact factor: 2.655
Figure 1Correlation between duration and costs of admission. The figure shows that an improved nutritional care entails a (marginal) reduction in the hospitalisation period at the end of the period. Hotel costs include costs related to food, care, linen, cleaning, buildings and the like and the daily hotel cost is calculated as the bed day charge used in the DRG system for disbursement of hospital days in excess of the normal hospital admission period. (From Drummond MF, O'Brien B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 1997: 63.)
Factors that promote or inhibit optimal nutritional carefrom the perspective of the production kitchen, the ward and the hospital management.
| Frequent contact to the nursing staff and patients | Lack of contact to the nursing staff and patients |
| That the kitchen follows the food right until it is served to the patient | That the kitchen does not follow or have any influence on how the food is served |
| High visibility within the organisation and hence the possibility to enhance knowledge of and respect for the kitchen staff's work from other professional groups | Low visibility within the organisation with the result that other professional groups know little about the kitchen staff's work. |
| Lack of economic latitude | |
| That a professionally trained person works actively with nutritional care and has the necessary time to do so in practice | Lack of time for nutritional care, which is therefore accorded low priority |
| The presence of key personnel or committed individuals | That responsibility for the practical implementation of nutritional care is collective, but that only few are actively engaged |
| That the hospital ward can provide different types of food 24 hours a day, and that the staff serve these food items to the patients | That formal responsibility for nutritional care lies with the physicians, who rarely involve themselves in nutritional issues |
| The availability of cross-disciplinary guidelines for tracing patients at risk and for implementing nutritional care of various categories of patient | That the clinical dietician's expertise is underutilised |
| That the nursing staff are unable to provide food outside the fixed mealtimes | |
| Clear signals from management about the importance of optimal nutritional care | Weak or lacking signals from management about the importance of nutritional care |
| Access to management tools for quality assurance, support and assessment of nutritional care | Absence of management tools for obtaining the insight to be able to assess nutritional care at departmental level |
| Resources to follow-up and support implementation of nutritional care guidelines | |
Factors that promote or inhibit optimal nutritional care from the perspective of the patient.
| That the patient has a real choice of menu at mealtimes | That the patient is not provided with the possibility to choose between menus adapted to preference, ability to chew, etc. |
| That the meal is adapted to the patient, for example with respect to consistency and size of portions | That the patient is not offered between-meal snacks and oral nutritional supplements for 12 of the 24 hours in a day |
| That the patient is informed about what the production kitchen can offer | That the patient is not informed about what the production kitchen can offer |
| Dialogue between the patient and nursing staff about the meals and menu choices | Lack of dialogue between the patient and nursing staff about individual needs and wishes |
| That presentation of the meals is appealing | That the patient's nutritional status is not monitored, and the patient's knowledge of his/her own weight loss is not utilized by the nursing staff |
Results of cost analysis for the three participating bed sections. 2003-price level.
| Participating bed section at Hospital | Participating bed section at Hospital | Participating bed section at Hospital | |
| A | B, | C, | |
| Number of patients hospitalised, total 2001/2002 | 992 | 1457 | 425 |
| Number of patients aged 60+ hospitalised for more than 7 days | 249 | 440 | 371 |
| Number of undernourished patients if 35% are assumed to be undernourished during the admission | 87 | 154 | 130 |
| Number of saved bed days | 296 | 524 | 441 |
| Saved USD | 66,412 | 117,355 | 98,952 |
| Saved USD with full-time assistant dietician | 26,181 | 36,893 | 18,490 |
Number of admissions at Danish departments of internal medicine* in 2001. The patients were above the age of 59 years and hospitalised for at least 7 days.
| Medical patients, variable | |
| Number of admissions | 81,705 |
| Average bed days (min = 7 days) | 17.8 days |
| Average age (min. = 60 years) | 76 years |
*Departments of internal medicine include the speciality internal medicine and subspecialties like geriatrics, hepatology, haematology, infectious diseases, cardiology, medical allergology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, medico-pulmonary diseases, nephrology and rheumatology.
Scenarios illustrating the cost saving potential for the entire country upon improvement of medical inpatients' nutritional care. The calculation only includes hospitalisation courses for patients above the age of 59 years who are hospitalised for at least 7 days (2003 – price level). Row II to VI presents the results of the sensitivity analysis. The variation in reduction of days (0.7 and 6.1 respectively) is taken from [14]. Extra allocation of resources (i.e. hiring an nutrition assistant) is included due to inspiration from [6]. The variation in the percentage of under-nourished is based on [5].
| Assumptions | Reduction in number of inpatient days | Annual cost reduction (USD) | |
| I | 35% under-nourished. 3.4 days' reduction in hospital stay. No allocation of extra resources. | 97,229 | 22 m. |
| II | 35% under-nourished. 0.7 days' reduction in hospital stay. No allocation of extra resources. | 19,732 | 4 m. |
| III | 35% under-nourished. 6.1 days' reduction in hospital stay. No allocation of extra resources. | 175,012 | 39 m. |
| IV | 35% under-nourished. 3.4 days' reduction in hospital stay. Extra allocation of resources (i.e. hiring of nutrition assistant). | 97,229 | 6 m. |
| V | 20% under-nourished. 3.4 days' reduction in hospital stay. No allocation of extra resources. | 55,559 | 12 m. |
| VI | 50% under-nourished. 3.4 days' reduction in hospital stay. No allocation of extra resources. | 138,899 | 31 m. |