Prospective validation of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition criteria for identifying malnutrition in hospitals: A protocol and feasibility pilot study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to pilot a protocol for prospective validation of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria in hospital patients and evaluate its feasibility and patient acceptability. METHODS: The validation protocol follows the GLIM consortium's rigorous methodological guidance. Protocol feasibility was assessed against criteria on recruitment (≥50%) and data collection completion (≥80%); protocol acceptability was assessed via patient satisfaction surveys and interviews. Adult inpatients in a tertiary hospital underwent four nutrition assessments (each by a different assessor); two Subjective Global Assessments (SGAs) and two GLIM assessments. All five GLIM criteria were assessed with bioelectrical impedance analysis used for muscle mass. Interrater reliability, criterion validity, and predictive validity were reported to detect trends. RESULTS: All primary feasibility criteria were met (consent rate 76%; data for GLIM criterion validity collected on 83% participants). Of predictive outcome data, 100% of hospital-related data, 82% of 6-month mortality data, and 39% of 6-month health-related quality of life data were collected. The mean (SD) age of participants was 61.0 ± 16.2 years, and 51.5% were male. The median (interquartile range) length of stay and body mass index were 7 (4-15) days and 25.6 (24.2-33.0) kg/m2, respectively. GLIM criteria diagnosed 70% of the patients as malnourished vs 55% with SGA. Most patients found the data collection acceptable with minimal burden. CONCLUSION: The methods outlined in this rigorous GLIM validation protocol are feasible to undertake in hospitals and acceptable to patients. This paper provides practical methodological guidance for future prospective GLIM validation studies.

Management of eating disorders during pregnancy: A survey of Australian dietitians in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Eating disorders (EDs) are estimated to affect 5.2%-7.5% of pregnant women, equating to 15,800-23,000 births in Australia annually. In pregnancy, an ED increases the risk of complications for both mother and child. Heightened motivation and increased utilisation of healthcare services during pregnancy present an opportunity to identify and commence ED treatment. Dietetic management of EDs differs from nutrition guidelines for pregnancy. This study aimed to assess current practice, confidence and training needs of dietitians to manage EDs in pregnancy. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of Australian dietitians with past year exposure to ED and/or antenatal fields was completed using Microsoft Forms between November 2022 and January 2023. RESULTS: One hundred and seventeen responses were analysed. Confidence was less for assessment of a woman with an active ED in pregnancy than a pregnant woman with a history of an ED, pregnancy or an ED alone (p < 0.001). Greater than 5 years of experience as a dietitian, but without recent exposure to the patient population, was associated with increased confidence (p < 0.01). Almost half provided descriptions of treatments and interventions used to treat a pregnant woman with an ED, some of which conflict with ED or antenatal guidelines. Dietitians were more likely to weigh a person with an ED in pregnancy. Most respondents indicated further training (93%) and guidelines (98%) would be helpful. CONCLUSION: This is the first investigation into the dietetic management of EDs in pregnancy, and it highlights a need for guidelines and training for dietitians.

Measuring performance in allied health professional role substitution models of care: a clinician survey.

BACKGROUND: Professional role substitution models of care have emerged as a key strategy to address increasing healthcare demand. Gaining insights from those actively engaged in the process of these models' implementation and evaluation is pivotal to ensuring sustainability and further successful implementation. The purpose of this study was to describe allied-health clinicians' perceptions, practice, and experiences of healthcare performance evaluation in professional role substitution models of care. METHODS: Data were collected via an online platform between 22 June - 22 July 2022 using a combination of convenience and network-based sampling of allied-health clinicians involved or interested in the implementation and evaluation of professional role substitution models of care. Clinicians answered 25 questions which consisted of demographic and targeted questions regarding performance evaluation across six domains of healthcare quality (effectiveness, safety, appropriateness, access & equity, continuity of care, and cost, efficiency, productivity & sustainability). RESULTS: A total of 102 clinicians accessed the survey, with 72 providing complete survey data. Eleven allied-health professions were represented, working across twelve specialities in thirteen hospital and health services. Whilst most allied-health clinicians (93-100%) supported measuring performance in each of the six healthcare quality domains, only 26-58% were measuring these domains in practice. Allied-health leadership support (62.5%), clinician drive (62.5%), consumer engagement (50%) and medical support (46%) were enablers whilst a lack of resources (human, time, financial (47%)), healthcare performance frameworks and/or policies (40%) were identified as barriers. Given the opportunity, clinicians would invest the most financial resources in digital solutions as a core strategy to improve performance evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Allied-health professionals expressed strong support for principles of performance evaluation, however in practice, performance evaluation is still in its infancy in professional role substitution models of care. Organisations can implement strategies that maximise the enablers whilst addressing barriers identified to improve performance evaluation in these models of care.

The health service perspective on determinants of success in allied health student research project collaborations: a qualitative study guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

BACKGROUND: A research culture in health care organisations is associated with improved healthcare performance. Allied health (AH) students undertake research training as part of their professional degree qualifications. This may include participation in research projects, sometimes undertaken in association with health services. Co-supervision of these projects by health service staff provides research capacity building opportunities and staff-centred outcomes for the individuals involved, as well as improvements in clinical knowledge and practice within the local area. Also, publications from these projects contribute to the wider evidence base. Identification of barriers and facilitators to engagement in, and conduct of, these projects may optimise systems for improved health service outcomes. METHODS: This formative evaluation used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to guide analysis of qualitative data obtained from semi-structured interviews with health service-employed allied health professionals, including clinicians and research fellows, who had supervised students on clinical-related research placements within the previous five years. RESULTS: Eleven AH clinicians described 18 collaborative projects with 24 students from five AH disciplines across four universities. Three health service-employed AH research fellows described their involvement in these and other student research projects. Twenty key determinant constructs were identified and mapped across all five CFIR domains. Facilitators included health service cosmopolitanism, project adaptability and implementation climate (compatibility). Health service-employed research fellows provided readiness for implementation and a facilitator for project execution. The main barriers identified were cost to staff in workload and personal time and aspects related to project complexity. Differing student characteristics affected the relative advantage of collaborative projects in positive and negative manners. CONCLUSIONS: This study describes the facilitators and barriers to the conduct of collaborative AH student research projects. Addressing these determinants when establishing each new project may enable health services to optimise communication, role delineation and project success, and thus ultimately, healthcare performance and patient care.

Impacts of the Early COVID-19 Response on Allied Health Staff Within an Australian Tertiary Health Service: A Qualitative Study.

Purpose: Understanding the experiences and needs of healthcare workers is crucial in strengthening healthcare system resilience during times of change. We aimed to explore allied health (AH) professionals' perceptions of the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic response on their work experiences. Participants and Methods: Qualitative descriptive study using thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with AH professionals employed in a large Australian health service. Results: Four themes were conceptualized from interviews of 21 AH clinicians and consolidated with six AH managers. Impacts were at personal, service, and systems levels. An overarching theme of "acceptance of circumstances due to the pandemic" influenced experiences within each level. Service changes included service cessation, remote service delivery, new COVID-19 protocols and role or work location alterations. Some staff were empowered in making practice changes, while others lost research or career opportunities. Despite low COVID-19-related hospitalizations and fatalities, staff reported stresses from workload changes and fear for self or loved ones. Open, clear communication assisted in alleviating anxiety, while perceived involvement in decision making and administrative and/or technical support for implementation of new processes facilitated change management processes. Conclusion: The study demonstrates the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic response on AH professionals. Gleaned in a context with limited community disease transmission and without the challenges of providing care for large numbers of COVID-19 patients, the findings have implications for change management within health services in any context in which rapid change is required. The wellbeing of the workforce should be forefront. Clear communication is critical, with staff involved in decision-making where possible. The needs of vulnerable staff should be considered with clear processes and eligibility guidelines to ensure provision of appropriate support and transparency of decision making. Workloads should be monitored, and adequate infrastructure, technical support and training provided for new initiatives or processes.

Use of a Very Low Calorie Diet for Weight Loss in a Patient with Acute Kidney Injury and Class III Obesity: A Case Study.

Very low calorie diets (VLCDs) induce rapid weight loss through severe energy restriction resulting in ketosis. VLCD manufacturer guidelines list acute kidney injury (AKI) as a contraindication for use with concerns around further damage to kidney function through increased protein catabolic load, diuresis, and risk of electrolyte derangements. We report on the successful concurrent management of AKI alongside provision of a VLCD for weight loss in the acute setting in a patient with class III obesity and comorbid complications during a prolonged hospital stay. AKI resolved at week 5 of a 15-week VLCD program, with no adverse side effects noted on electrolytes, fluid, or kidney function. A weight loss of 76 kg was attained. VLCD appears safe for use in patients with AKI during hospitalization under close medical supervision. Both health system sustainability and patients may benefit from seizing the opportunity to address obesity during protracted hospital admission.

"How do I keep this live in my mind?" Allied Health Professionals' perspectives of barriers and enablers to implementing good clinical practice principles in research: a qualitative exploration.

BACKGROUND: Allied health professionals (AHPs) engaged in research are expected to comply with Good Clinical Practice (GCP) principles to protect participant safety and wellbeing and enhance data integrity. Currently, few studies have explored health professionals' perceptions of implementing and adhering to GCP principles in research with none of these including AHPs. Such knowledge is vital to guide future interventions to increase adherence to GCP principles. This study aimed to identify the barriers and enablers AHPs experience when applying GCP principles to research conduct in a public hospital and health service, as well as their perceived support needs. METHODS: The study used a qualitative descriptive study approach guided by behaviour change theory. AHPs currently undertaking ethically approved research within a public health service in Queensland, Australia were interviewed to explore barriers and enablers to adherence to GCP principles and support needs, with interview questions guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). The TDF was chosen as it allows for a systematic understanding of factors influencing implementation of a specific behaviour (i.e., GCP implementation) and can be used to inform tailored interventions. RESULTS: Ten AHPs across six professions were interviewed. Participants identified both enablers and barriers to implementing GCP across nine domains of the TDF and enablers across three additional domains. Examples of enablers included strong beliefs about the importance of GCP in increasing research rigour and participant safety (i.e. from TDF - beliefs about consequences); applying clinical skills and personal attributes when implementing GCP (i.e., skills), available training and support (i.e., environmental context and resources); and alignment with their moral sense to 'do the right thing' (i.e., professional identity). Barriers to GCP implementation were generally less commonly reported but included reduced time to implement GCP and a sense of 'red tape' (i.e., environmental context and resources), a lack of knowledge of GCP principles (i.e., knowledge) and a fear of making mistakes (i.e., emotions), and varying relevance to individual projects (i.e., knowledge). Suggestions for support were identified beyond training, such as physical resources (e.g., prescriptive checklists, templates and scripts), additional time, and regular one-on-one mentoring support. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that while clinicians recognise the importance of GCP and want to implement it, they report barriers to its practical implementation. GCP training alone is unlikely to address these barriers to implementing GCP in daily practice. Findings suggest that GCP training may be more useful to AHPs when it is tailored to the allied heath context and supplemented with additional supports including check-ups from experienced researchers and access to prescriptive resources. Future research however is needed to investigate the effectiveness of such strategies.

Patient Preferences for Attributes that Characterise Alternative Models of Care in Gastroenterology: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

OBJECTIVES: Increased demand for gastroenterology services has resulted in growing waitlists, with patients at risk of exceeding clinically recommended wait-times. Given limited healthcare resources, expanded scope models of care are an option to help address this demand, but little is known about patient preferences for these models of care. METHODS: Low-risk gastroenterology patients (n = 1198) referred to an outpatient tertiary service in Australia over a 2-year period were invited to participate in an unlabelled discrete choice experiment with seven attributes: primary healthcare professional, wait-time, continuity of care, consultation length, manner and communication skills, reassurance, and cost. These were developed using qualitative research, literature review, and stakeholders' experiences. A d-efficient fractional design was used to construct four blocks of 12 choice sets, with two alternatives. A 13th choice set was included as a data and quality check. Latent class and mixed logit regression were used for analysis. The resulting preference parameters for individual attributes were then used to calculate willingness to pay and willingness to wait. RESULTS: Overall, the model based on the 347 respondents suggested no strong preference for professional background. All other attributes were statistically significant predictors of preference (p < 0.001), with respondents willing to make significant trade-offs (time and cost) before accepting deterioration in attributes. There was strong emphasis on manner and communication skills, with a clinician who listens and provides good explanations overwhelmingly the most important attribute. Latent class analysis identified two patient segments who differed in their preference for the primary treating healthcare professional (doctor or dietitian) based on exposure to either traditional medical or non-medical professional role substitution model. CONCLUSIONS: Patients have strong but varied preferences for gastroenterology services based on whether they have been exposed to expanded scope models of care. Design and implementation of new models of care need to consider strategies to overcome any perceived loss in utility or deterioration in healthcare quality for those unfamiliar with professional role substitution.

Experiences of hospital allied health professionals in collaborative student research projects: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Active engagement in research by healthcare organisations and clinicians is associated with improvements in healthcare performance. Barriers to research engagement by clinician allied health (AH) professionals include competing priorities from high clinical workloads, lack of research skills and confidence, and lack of supportive research relationships. Collaboration with universities on joint clinical research projects is well recognised as a means of building health service research capacity. Research projects undertaken by students as part of their qualifying degree represent one such opportunity. However, there are few reports evaluating these collaborations from the health service perspective. METHODS: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis to explore the experiences of AH professionals in the co-supervision of students completing research placements as part of their professional degree course. RESULTS: Fourteen health service employees from six allied health disciplines described collaborations on research projects with 24 students from four different universities. Student placements and projects varied widely in length of placement, extent of collaboration, supervision structure and study design. Three overarching themes were identified in the AH professional co-supervision experience: 1) Professional growth; 2) Mismatch with expectations; and 3) Focus on the student. Project outcomes were categorised from the health system perspective. These were 1) Healthcare performance improvements, including local increases in staff clinical practice knowledge and wider contributions to the evidence base; 2) Research capacity gains within the health service, including research knowledge and skill development, collaborative linkages and opportunity for future research; and 3) Staff-centred outcomes including increased job satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the potential for AH professional supervision of students on research placements to contribute to healthcare performance improvements and research capacity gains within health services, alongside providing personal benefits for the AH professionals involved. Early consultation with a health service-employed research specialist may support health professional and student learning, team collaboration and project coordination for these student projects.

Role substitution of specialist medical doctors with allied-health professionals: A qualitative exploration of patients' experiences and perceptions of healthcare quality.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The need to improve patient access, offer increased choice and improve patient outcomes whilst maintaining safe care is driving the healthcare workforce to evolve. Extending allied-health scope of practice by integrating models of care that traverse traditional professional boundaries has been one such strategy. This study explored patients' acceptance and experiences of four allied-health extended scope of practice models of care. The study aimed to identify dimensions of quality healthcare that matter to patients and describe the extent to which they perceived these to be delivered in allied-health professional role substitution models of care. METHODS: Qualitative methodology using semistructured interviews were conducted with 29 participants who had received treatment from an allied-health professional role substitution model. This was a purposeful sample with recruitment across genders, ages and social backgrounds. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and independently analysed by two researchers using a thematic approach. RESULTS: Six major themes were identified which revealed dimensions of healthcare quality that were important to participants: Balancing expectations and overall satisfaction; Timely access and convenience; Continuity, integration and coordination of care; Clinician expert skills, professional manner and interpersonal attributes; Financial considerations when receiving care; and Perceptions of treatment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights participants' views and experiences of allied-health extended scope of practice models of care. Service delivery models were an acceptable alternative to traditional specialist medical care with the perception that extended scope of practice models of care delivered many aspects of quality care that mattered to patients.

Measuring performance of professional role substitution models of care against traditional medical care in healthcare-A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To identify outcome measures used to evaluate performance of healthcare professional role substitution against usual medical doctor or specialist medical doctor care to facilitate our understanding of the adequacy of these measures in assessing quality of healthcare delivery. METHODS: Using a systematic approach, we searched Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science from database inception until May 2020. Studies that presented original comparative data on at least one outcome measure were included following screening by two authors. Findings were synthesized, and outcome measures classified into six domains which included: effectiveness, safety, appropriateness, access, continuity of care, efficiency, and sustainability which were informed by the Institute of Medicine dimensions of healthcare quality, the Australian health performance framework, and Levesque and Sutherland's integrated performance measurement framework. RESULTS: One thirty five articles met the inclusion criteria, describing 58 separate outcome measures. Safety of role substitution models of care was assessed in 80 studies, effectiveness (n = 60), appropriateness (n = 40), access (n = 36), continuity of care (n = 6), efficiency and productivity (n = 45). Two-thirds of the studies that assessed productivity and efficiency performed an economic analysis (n = 27). The quality and rigour of evaluations varied substantially across studies, with two-thirds of all studies measuring and reporting outcomes from only one or two of these domains. CONCLUSIONS: There are a growing number of studies measuring the performance of non-medical healthcare professional substitution roles. Few have been subject to robust evaluations, and there is limited evidence on the scientific rigour and adequacy of outcomes measured. A systematic and coordinated approach is required to support healthcare settings in assessing the value of non-medical role substitution healthcare delivery models.

Is the frequency of dietitian support associated with greater clinical improvements in adults with Crohn's disease undertaking exclusive enteral nutrition?

BACKGROUND: Exclusive enteral nutrition (EEN) is considered to be an effective, low-risk therapy in the treatment of Crohn's disease (CD). Frequent dietetic support may assist adults to succeed. The present observational study aimed to compare whether the frequency of dietetic support during EEN therapy was associated with differences in clinical and nutritional outcomes across two gastroenterology inflammatory bowel disease services. Site A provided ≥3 visits plus more if clinically indicated and Site B provided weekly support. METHODS: Eligible patients were adults with active CD recommended to be treated with oral EEN for ≥6 weeks between February 2018 and December 2019. Demographic, anthropometric, clinical, medications, pathology and EEN treatment descriptors were sourced from the medical chart. Descriptive statistics, as well as chi-squared and t tests, were used to compare data between sites. RESULTS: Eighty-four CD patients were eligible (44 ± 14 years, 54% female, baseline Crohn's disease activity index [CDAI] 259.5 ± 113.1, n = 51 Site A) and completed EEN for median (range) 6.1 (1-12) weeks. Most patients (82%, n = 69/84) completed ≥6 weeks of EEN treatment. CDAI score and calprotectin improved across the total sample from pre- to post-EEN by -109.8 ± 92.1 (p < 0.001) and -65 µg g-1 (-65,230 to 4370) (p = 0.002), respectively. Dietitian occasions of service were more frequent at Site B (7 [4-12] occasions vs. 3 [1-8], p < 0.001). However, changes in clinical and biomarker data were similar between sites (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: EEN with regular dietetic input resulted in clinical and biochemical improvements for patients with active CD. Tailoring dietetic support based on the client's needs and preference may achieve clinical improvements similar to providing weekly dietetic support to adults on EEN.

Health service usage and re-referral rates: comparison of a dietitian-first clinic with a medical specialist-first model of care in a cohort of gastroenterology patients.

BACKGROUND: The dietitian-first gastroenterology clinic (DFGC) is an expanded scope of practice initiative implemented in response to increased gastroenterology specialist demand. This study examined re-referral rates to gastroenterology and overall health service usage up to 24 months post management in DFGC compared with a traditional, gastroenterology specialist-first model. METHODS: Patients discharged from DFGC in the first year were matched with those seen in the traditional model. Demographic, clinical and process-related service characteristics were compared, and logistic regression analysis was undertaken to model re-presentation and model of care (MoC) as the variable of interest considering covariates in univariate analyses. Analyses were performed at 12, 18 and 24 months post discharge. RESULTS: The DFGC (122 patients) and traditional-model (62 patients) cohorts had similar baseline demographic characteristics. Wait-times (68.6 vs 272.9 days; p<0.001), treatment-times (89.4 vs 259.9 days; p<0.001) and usage of other services (1.4 vs 2.1 specialities; p=0.01) were lower in DFGC. Re-referral rates were low in both DFGC and traditional models at 12 months (0.82% vs 1.61%), 18 months (2.46% vs 6.45%) and 24 months (4.91% vs 8.06%), respectively, with no significant difference between the models at any time point. CONCLUSION: Most patients do not re-present for similar conditions within 2 years when managed in the DFGC or traditional medical model. Patients managed in DFGC have lower overall health service usage compared with patients managed in the traditional model. These findings support the safety and effectiveness of a DFGC model as one strategy to manage specialist gastroenterology service demands.

Intradialytic parenteral nutrition improves nutritional status in a complex cystic fibrosis patient with redo double lung transplant and end-stage renal disease.

This case study reports on the use of intradialytic parenteral nutrition (IDPN) to address severe malnutrition in a 38-year-old woman, redo double lung transplant recipient with a complex medical history including cystic fibrosis and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on haemodialysis. Gastroparesis and severe postprandial abdominal pain limited oral/enteral nutrition input. The addition of IDPN resulted in a dry weight increase of 13.6% over a 12-month period and an improvement in the patient's malnutrition status from severe (Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG SGA) C24) to moderate (PG SGA B7). The patient stated she would recommend IDPN to others in a similar situation. Management of patients with coexisting cystic fibrosis and ESRD with or without haemodialysis requires patient engagement in treatment planning and a multidisciplinary team approach for clinical judgement in the absence of guidelines. As advances in medical care see more patients with these coexisting conditions, IDPN may provide an increasingly useful adjunct therapy.

Feasibility of using the "modified NUTrition Risk In the Critically ill" nutritional risk screening tool to identify nutritionally at-risk patients in an Australian intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: The modified NUTrition Risk In the Critically ill (mNUTRIC) score has been demonstrated to accurately quantify the risk of negative patient outcomes and discriminate which patients will benefit the most from nutrition intervention in an intensive care unit (ICU) setting. Calculation of an mNUTRIC score, however, may be time-intensive and unable to be performed within available resources. This may prevent high-risk patients from being identified and reviewed by a dietitian. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of using the mNUTRIC tool to screen for patients at increased nutrition risk and to determine the proportion of those high-risk patients who were reviewed by a dietitian. SUBJECTS/METHODS: A retrospective observational study of 260 critically ill patients was conducted between 01/01/2017 and 30/05/2017 in a 20-bed Australian tertiary ICU. Participants included all adults admitted to the ICU for more than 72 h. Feasible implementation was defined as calculating an mNUTRIC score in <5 min per patient where all data were available for >90% of patients. RESULTS: A median time of 4 min and 54 s (interquartile range: 4.3-5.6 min) was required to calculate each mNUTRIC score, with 96% of scores calculated in <10 min. Data were available to calculate mNUTRIC scores for 93% (241/260) of patients. The mNUTRIC tool identified 81 patients at high nutrition risk, 44% (36/81) of whom were not reviewed by a dietitian. There were 21 high-risk patients who were purposefully excluded from dietetic review for various clinical reasons, leaving 15 high-risk patients (19%) who were not reviewed by a dietitian. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the mNUTRIC tool was not feasible in our ICU, given the set dietetic resources (0.6 full-time equivalent). Shared responsibility of nutrition screening or automating the calculation may be possible solutions to increase feasibility of mNUTRIC screening.

A dietitian-first gastroenterology clinic results in improved symptoms and quality of life in patients referred to a tertiary gastroenterology service.

BACKGROUND: The Dietitian First Gastroenterology Clinic (DFGC) is an initiative that has been established in response to increased gastroenterology clinical demand resulting in increased number of patients waiting outside clinically recommended timeframes for specialist care. In this clinic, a dietitian is the primary contact for eligible patients referred to tertiary gastroenterology services and provides assessment and management strategies for patients under the clinical governance of a gastroenterology consultant. This service has previously been shown to reduce patient wait-times and induce excellent patient satisfaction. Evaluation of models of care need to consider patient health outcomes as a key indicator for overall health service effectiveness. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of DFGC on patient related health outcomes. METHODS: This study utilised a pretest-posttest design of patients seen in the DFGC who met the diagnostic criteria for irritable bowel syndrome using the Rome IV criteria Consenting participants completed the validated symptom-severity (IBS-SSS) and health-related quality of life (IBSQoL) assessments. Paired sample t-tests were used to analyse differences pre- and post-management in the DFGC. Univariate mixed effects analyses were conducted to examine associations between IBS-SSS, IBSQoL and patient demographics. RESULTS: A total of 80 of 122 patients seen in the DFGC were recruited and completed baseline data, with 60 (75%) completing follow up assessments. The average participant age was 35.6 years (75% female), and IBS subtypes; IBS-C 15.0%, IBS-D 38.3%, IBS-M 26.7% and IBS-U 20.0%. Participants experienced significant reductions in symptom severity based on IBS-SSS (300.1 vs 151.7; p < 0.001) independent of IBS subtype, age or gender, with 88% (53/60) experiencing a clinically significant improvement. Quality of life significantly improved for all IBS subtypes (p < 0.001) across all subscales except food avoidance (p = 0.11). There was a moderate negative correlation between the changes in symptom severity and quality of life (R = 0.432, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Management in the DFGC provided positive patient health outcomes demonstrated by improvements in symptom severity and QoL.

Dietitian first gastroenterology clinic: an initiative to reduce wait lists and wait times for gastroenterology outpatients in a tertiary hospital service.

OBJECTIVE: The demand for outpatient gastroenterology medical specialist consultations is above what can be met within budgetary and staffing constraints. This study describes the establishment of a dietitian first gastroenterology clinic to address this issue, the patient journey and its impact on wait lists and wait times in a tertiary gastroenterology service. DESIGN: A dietitian first gastroenterology clinic model was developed and a mixed-methods approach used to evaluate the impact of the service over a 21-month period. SETTING: Gold Coast University Hospital, Queensland, Australia (a public tertiary hospital). PATIENTS: 658 patients were triaged to the clinic between June 2016 and March 2018. INTERVENTION: A dietitian first gastroenterology clinic for low-risk gastroenterology patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We examined demographic, referral, wait list, wait time and service activity data, patient satisfaction and patient journey. RESULTS: At the time of audit, 399 new (67.9% female) and 307 review patients had been seen. Wait times for eligible patients reduced from 280 to 66 days and the percentage of those in breach of their recommended wait times reduced from 95% to zero. The average time from referral to discharge was 117.8 days with an average of 2.4 occasions of service. 277 patients (69.4%) had been discharged to the care of their general practitioner and 43 patients (10.7%) had an expedited specialist medical review. Patient surveys indicated a high level of satisfaction. CONCLUSION: A dietitian first gastroenterology model of care helps improve patient flow, reduces wait times and may be useful elsewhere to address outpatient gastroenterology service pressures.

Use of the malnutrition screening tool by non-dietitians to identify at-risk patients in a rehabilitation setting: A validation study.

AIM: Malnutrition is highly prevalent in rehabilitation patients, and screening is important to allow for timely intervention to reduce the incidence of adverse clinical outcomes. We aimed to determine the reliability and validity of the commonly employed malnutrition screening tool by non-dietitian staff in categorising patients at risk of malnutrition in the rehabilitation setting. METHODS: This prospective observational cohort study recruited 100 participants on admission to a rehabilitation ward. The malnutrition screening tool was applied by nursing staff and repeated by nutrition assistants. Results were compared to malnutrition as determined by dietitian-applied subjective global assessment of each patient. Inter-rater reliability tests were conducted with two dietitians, two nutrition assistants and two nurses independently but simultaneously recording malnutrition screening tool scores on a subgroup of 15 participants. RESULTS: Agreement between dietitian-determined malnutrition and risk as identified by nutrition assistant and nursing staff screening tool application was only modest (64% and 51%, respectively). While both professions met the a priori criteria for acceptable specificity (≥60%), neither met the criterion for adequate sensitivity (≥80%). The inter-rater reliability of the tool was excellent, with almost perfect agreement (≥0.89) between ward dietitian and nutrition assistants, and moderate to substantial agreement (0.56-0.65) with nursing staff, when compared to a senior dietitian. CONCLUSIONS: Non-dietitian staff failed to apply the malnutrition screening tool with sufficient sensitivity in normal ward practice to warrant its use in the rehabilitation setting. Alternative options for identification of malnutrition need to be considered to ensure appropriate treatment.