Rationale: In 2016, a completely revised second version of the ‘Handbook Nutrition in Cancer’ (HNC, in Dutch) by the Dutch Dietitians Oncology Group (DDOG) was published. In this project, the DDOG evaluated similarities and potential discrepancies between DDOG recommendations and the ESPEN guidelines for the identification, prevention and treatment of reversible elements of malnutrition during and after cancer treatment.Methods: The recommendations of the DDOG, as published in the HCN, were systematically compared with the ESPEN guidelines on nutrition in cancer patients. guidelines. However, DDOG recommendations are more detailed, comprehensive, and practical.The DDOG and the ESPEN guidelines differ in that the DDOG 1) recommends the comprehensive PG-SGA and PG-SGA Short Form for screening and nutritional assessment; 2) recommends to start artificial nutrition at an earlier stage; 3) does not recommend increasing the ratio of energy from fat/energy from carbohydrates in weight-losing cancer patients with insulin resistance; 4) includes a less conservative recommendation on increasing energy intake for prevention of refeeding syndrome; and 5) supports a longer period of corticosteroid use to increase appetite (4-8 weeks vs ESPEN 1-3 weeks).AdditionallyResults: Overall, the DDOG recommendations are in line with the ESPEN , the DDOG does not include a specific advice for parenteral nutrition composition during intensive chemotherapy, and includes the advice to avoid fatty fish/fish oil 24 hours before and after specific chemotherapy treatment.Both guidelines recommend nutritional care to be accompanied by exercise training.Conclusion: The DDOG and ESPEN recommendations are generally in line with each other, but the DDOG recommendations are more specific and practical. DDOG and ESPEN are complementary to each other.
LINK
Introduction:The recently published 2018 ESPEN Guidelines on Clinical Nutrition in the Intensive Care Unit [1] represents a valuable revision of the 2006 Enteral Nutrition Guidelines [2] and the 2009 Parenteral Nutrition Guidelines [3] published earlier by this European group. The guidelines committee members have done an excellent job in putting thismanuscript together, providing directives that are clear, concise, brief, and most importantly, transparent. They included only studies published since 2000 for use in their meta-analyses, commenting that this time of transition heralded a new era in the literature involving higher quality randomized control trials (RCTs) and methodologic innovations such as trial registry. Not mentioned (but felt by many within the nutrition community) was the sense that this particular time was a tipping point, following the publication of Van den Berghe’s seminal paper on intensive insulin therapy [4]. Studies published in nutrition prior to this date were felt to reflect an older more antiquated style of management that was less effective. These authors utilized the persistent inflammation catabolism syndrome (PICS) system where four parameters (the patient, intervention, controls, and outcomes) are clearly described, which in turn direct the questions that the guideline committee members were to address. Quality of evidence was assessed by GRADE methodology, and a cut-off date of August 2017 for data entry from the literature was clearly identified. Not all of the recommendations were based on RCTs. The authors are to be commended in that they provided recommendations based on Level 4 low-quality evidence, in areas where RCTs were not available, clearly taking advantage of the group of experts on the committee to provide practical guidance for clinicians where there was a paucity of literature to support evidence-based practices.
DOCUMENT
Malnutrition is a serious and widespread health problem in community-dwelling older adults who receive care in hospital and at home. Hospital and home care nurses and nursing assistants have a key role in the delivery of high-quality multidisciplinary nutritional care. Nursing nutritional care in current practice, however, is still suboptimal, which impacts its quality and continuity. There appear to be at least two reasons for this. First, there is a lack of evidence for nutritional care interventions to be carried out by nurses. Second, there are several factors, that influence nurses’ and nursing assistants’ current behaviour, such as lack of knowledge, moderate awareness of the importance and neutral attitudes. This results in a lack of attention towards nutritional care. Therefore, there is a need to generate more evidence and to focus on targeting the factors that influence nurses’ and nursing assistants’ current behaviour to eventually promote behaviour change. To increase the likelihood of successfully changing their behaviour, an evidence-based educational intervention is appropriate. This might lead to enhancing nutritional care and positively impact nutritional status, health and well-being of community-dwelling older adults. The general objectives of this thesis are: 1) To understand the current state of evidence regarding nutrition-related interventions and factors that influence current behaviour in nutritional care for older adults provided by hospital and home care nurses and nursing assistants to prevent and treat malnutrition. 2) To develop an educational intervention for hospital and home care nurses and nursing assistants to promote behaviour change by affecting factors that influence current behaviour in nutritional care for older adults and to describe the intervention development and feasibility.
DOCUMENT
