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.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Dietetic interventions contribute to certain health objectives and other outcomes, but are mostly part of a multimodal and multidisciplinary approach what makes evaluating the actual effects of dietitians' involvement rather complex. Although monitoring and outcome evaluation (M&OE) can provide routine data to prove the effectiveness of dietetic interventions, this has not been established yet in different dietetic settings.METHODS: A comprehensive framework for M&OE in dietetics was developed by dietetic experts from five European higher education institutes for dietetics in the course of the EU sponsored project "Improvement of Education and Competences in Dietetics (IMPECD)".RESULTS: Firstly, clear definitions on M&OE are proposed to facilitate the use of consistent terminology, with a specific emphasis on the term "impact" covering macro-level outcomes such as cost-effectiveness. Secondly, the Dietetic Care Process (DCP) was merged into a logic model to demonstrate the position of M&OE in relation to intervention planning and implementation, in both group and individual settings. Thirdly, selecting the appropriate indicators is indispensable to monitor and evaluate outcomes, and requires a high level of dietitians' critical reasoning. A categorized overview of indicators is provided to support this process. Lastly, the consortium developed a checklist to give dietitians a handle on what elements could be included in their M&OE plan and trigger them to perform M&OE in practice.CONCLUSIONS: Innovative M&OE models may help dietitians to demonstrate their effectiveness in improving clinical outcomes and justify their role in health care.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Although up-to-date definitions for nutrition assessment integrate behavioural components, it is not clear what behavioural components are to be assessed. Since behavioural modification is linked to effective therapeutic dietetic interventions, assessing behaviour and factors influencing behaviour might be beneficial to improve personalized dietetic outcome. The aim of the following report is to emphasize the role of behavioural components and factors affecting behaviour at baseline nutrition assessment in personalized dietetic intervention.METHODS: The present work is part of the EU-funded project IMPECD ("Improvement of Education and Competences in Dietetics", www.impecd.eu). The project aims to improve the clarity and consistency of national dietetic process models to unify education and training of future dietitians. Experts from five European Universities of Applied Sciences (UAS) in Antwerp (BE), Fulda (DE), Groningen (NL), Neubrandenburg (DE) and St. Pölten (AT) developed a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) consisting of several clinical cases. It warranted a detailed evaluation of all dietetic care process steps, starting with nutrition assessment.RESULTS: Results for motivation assessed during nutrition assessment are not consistently positively associated with outcome and the added value of assessing them at baseline is still unclear. However, depressive symptoms, emotional distress, and anxiety negatively affect eating and physical activity and therefore limit the efficacy of the dietetic intervention. Assessing behavioural components including nutrition literacy is an important precondition for influence on behavioural modification.CONCLUSION: Indisputably, baseline assessment of behavioural components and factors influencing behaviour are important to increase the therapeutic efficacy of personalized dietetic interventions.
