Blanca E Enriquez-Fernández1, Sara Nejatinamini1, Sandra M Campbell2, Vera C Mazurak1, Wendy V Wismer3,4. 1. Department of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E1, Canada. 2. University of Alberta Libraries, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada. 3. Department of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E1, Canada. wwismer@ualberta.ca. 4. Department of Agricultural, Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Alberta, 3-18C Agriculture/Forestry Ctr, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E1, Canada. wwismer@ualberta.ca.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Oral nutritional supplements and fortified foods, here considered supplemented food products (SFP), are recommended as part of nutrition therapy guidelines to treat malnutrition among cancer patients. However, their successful use is limited by patients' failure to meet recommended intakes. This systematic review aimed to identify sensory preferences for SFP among cancer patients and evaluate the methodologies employed in sensory preference assessment. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in several relevant databases yielding 1056 papers of which 19 met the inclusion criteria. Two authors independently selected papers and extracted findings. The included papers were categorized according to the focus of the preference assessment. RESULTS: Studies comparing sensory preferences for SFP of cancer patients with those of a control group suggested that the liking for SFP by cancer patients differs from healthy participants. Patient heterogeneity in site and stage of tumor, variation in study methodologies, and type of treatment complicated a conclusion regarding the effects of cancer treatment and taste changes on taste preferences. However, some general results were observed among the studies, such as the preference for fresh milk-based supplements when compared with other supplement types. CONCLUSION: This review highlighted the need for consistent reporting and control of variables that influence the sensory characteristics of SFP when sensory preferences are assessed in the clinical setting. Attention to these methodological details will enhance the reliability and accuracy of sensory preference assessment among cancer patients for realistic evaluation of SFP targeted to their nutritional needs.
PURPOSE: Oral nutritional supplements and fortified foods, here considered supplemented food products (SFP), are recommended as part of nutrition therapy guidelines to treat malnutrition among cancerpatients. However, their successful use is limited by patients' failure to meet recommended intakes. This systematic review aimed to identify sensory preferences for SFP among cancerpatients and evaluate the methodologies employed in sensory preference assessment. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in several relevant databases yielding 1056 papers of which 19 met the inclusion criteria. Two authors independently selected papers and extracted findings. The included papers were categorized according to the focus of the preference assessment. RESULTS: Studies comparing sensory preferences for SFP of cancerpatients with those of a control group suggested that the liking for SFP by cancerpatients differs from healthy participants. Patient heterogeneity in site and stage of tumor, variation in study methodologies, and type of treatment complicated a conclusion regarding the effects of cancer treatment and taste changes on taste preferences. However, some general results were observed among the studies, such as the preference for fresh milk-based supplements when compared with other supplement types. CONCLUSION: This review highlighted the need for consistent reporting and control of variables that influence the sensory characteristics of SFP when sensory preferences are assessed in the clinical setting. Attention to these methodological details will enhance the reliability and accuracy of sensory preference assessment among cancerpatients for realistic evaluation of SFP targeted to their nutritional needs.
Authors: Ashlea Braun; Christopher Simons; Jessica Kilbarger; Emily B Hill; Menglin Xu; Dennis Cleary; Colleen K Spees Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2021-03-17 Impact factor: 3.359
Authors: Jacco J de Haan; Remco J Renken; Yvette Moshage; Daniëlle A Kluifhooft; Camille Corbier; Louise E Daly; Hélène Blanchard; Anna K L Reyners Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2021-02-25 Impact factor: 3.603