Using a Dietetic Care Process (DCP) can lead to improved application of evidence-based guidelines and critical thinking in dietetics. One aim of the project Improvement of Education and Competences in Dietetics (IMPECD) is to develop a unified DCP for international educational purposes. Therefore, a comparison of European DCPs was needed.A concise literature search and semi-structured interviews with experts representing the full EFAD (European Federation of the Associations of Dietitians) member states were conducted from June to October 2017.16 out of 23 EFAD member states responded (70%) from which 13 indicated to use a DCP. Eight different DCPs were found, with four to six core steps and three graphical representations. In one country the use of a dietetic process is indicated by law. The DCPs have more similarities than differences as they follow the same principles. Differences in language or form may not limit the improvement in collaboration and international exchange in dietetic practice. These results provide a good basis for the development of a unified DCP for educational purposes.
DOCUMENT
Introduction: Different models of frameworks for dietetic care are used in Europe. There is a substantial need for a consistent framework to compare research results and to cooperate on an international level. Therefore, one of the goals of the EU-funded project IMPECD was the development of a unified framework Dietetic Care Process (DCP) in order to foster a shared understanding of process-driven dietetic counselling. Materials and Methods:: Based on a literature review and in-depth analysis of different frameworks an iterative and incremental development process of finding solutions for decision-making within the consortium consisting of dietetic experts from 5 European HEI was passed. The developed DCP model was integrated in an online training course including 9 clinical cases (MOOC) to train students. The draft versions and the concluding final version DCP model were evaluated and re-evaluated by teachers and 25 students at two Intensive Study Programmes. Results:: The DCP model consists of five distinct, interrelated steps which the consortium agreed on: Dietetic Assessment, Dietetic Diagnosis, Planning Dietetic Intervention, Implementing Dietetic Intervention, Dietetic Outcome Evaluation. A standardized scheme was developed to define the process steps: dedication, central statement, aim and principles, and operationalization. Discussion:: Existing different process models were analyzed to create a new and consistent concept of a unified framework DCP. The variety within the European countries represented by the consortium proved to be both a challenge in decision-making and an opportunity to integrate multinational perspectives and intensify the scientific discourse. The development of a standardized scheme with precise definitions is a prerequisite for planning study designs in health services research. Besides, clarification is essential for establishing process-guided work in practice. The evaluated MOOC is now implemented in study programmes used by 5 European HEI in order to keep approaches and process-driven action comparable. The MOOC promotes the exchange of ideas between future professionals on an international level.
DOCUMENT
Background: Although diagnosing and treating malnutrition, sarcopenia and underweight are recommended to be embedded and sustained within nutritional care, it is unknown if that is facilitated in geriatric rehabilitation. This study determined the proportion of geriatric rehabilitation inpatients with malnutrition, sarcopenia or underweight receiving dietetic interventions as part of routine clinical care and if these patients have greater improvements in body weight and composition compared to patients not receiving dietetic interventions.Methods: Geriatric rehabilitation inpatients from the observational REStORing health of acutely unwell adulTs (RESORT) cohort were included (n=971, median age 83.2 [77.7-88.8] years, 58.5% (n=568) females). Malnutrition, sarcopenia and underweight were defined by the Global Leadership Initiative of Malnutrition, European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2 and age-specific body mass index cut-offs. Data on dietetic interventions initiated by dietitians as part of clinical care was extracted from the centralised hospital database. Changes in body weight (kg), skeletal muscle mass (kg, %), and fat mass (kg, %) from admission to discharge were determined using linear mixed models.Results: Dietetic interventions were received by 306 (62.0%), 138 (71.5%) and 153 (76.9%) of patients with malnutrition (n=493), sarcopenia (n=193) and underweight (n=199). Duration and frequency of dietetic interventions were higher in patients with malnutrition, sarcopenia or underweight compared to patients without those conditions. There were no differences in body weight/composition changes in patients with malnutrition, sarcopenia or underweight receiving dietetic interventions compared to those not receiving interventions.Conclusions: One-third of geriatric rehabilitation inpatients with malnutrition, sarcopenia or underweight are not receiving dietetic interventions and therefore the referral and diagnostic process require improvements. Patients with malnutrition, sarcopenia or underweight receiving dietetic interventions had no greater improvements in body weight/composition compared to those who did not receive interventions. Tailoring dietetic interventions for malnutrition, sarcopenia and underweight diagnosis may improve patient outcomes.
MULTIFILE
