Nutritional intervention for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

AIM: The aim of the study was to assess the consequences of early and systematic nutritional intervention on the clinical conditions of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) patients and on the opportunity to maintain a good nutritional status for as long as possible. METHODS: Thirty-three subjects with ALS. Protocol Group: 12 subjects (9 M and 3 F) monitored according to a precise nutritional intervention protocol. CONTROL GROUP: 21 subjects (10 M and 11 F) monitored before applying the protocol. RESULTS: Data recorded at the time of initial assessment were compared and expressed as the mean ± standard deviation for the Protocol Group vs. the CONTROL GROUP: BMI (kg/m2) 23.6 ± 4.1 vs. 21.6 ± 3.5; weight loss as a percentage of usual weight 6.6 ± 7.9 vs. 16.3 ± 8.8 (P=0.003). At six months: weight loss as a percentage of usual weight 4.9 ± 6.2 vs. 16.9 ± 10.2 (P=0.002). At 12 months: weight loss as a percentage of usual weight 7.3 ± 7.1 vs. 17.5 ± 11.1 (P=0.03). At the first follow-up visit, fewer patients in the Protocol Group were receiving enteral nutrition (25%) than patients in the CONTROL GROUP (60%). At six-month follow-up visit: 30% vs. 68%. Standard enteral nutrition formulas were used. One year after initial assessment, the mortality rate was 17% for the Protocol Group, whereas it was 24% at six months and 33% after one year for the CONTROL GROUP. CONCLUSION: If patients are treated before any significant weight loss occurs, early and specific nutritional intervention allows good nutritional status to be maintained for a longer period; if artificial nutrition is required, standard diets are able to ensure adequate clinical results.

Analysis and improvement of organizational models for the management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a case study in north-east Italy.

PURPOSE: The study aimed to establish whether the organization for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus at 9 diabetic units (DUs), in 5 neighboring local health authorities (LHAs), was able to (a) comply with the organizational model prescribed by specific regional standards; (b) ensure adequate clinical management of diabetic patients; (c) assess whether the relationship between primary care physicians (PCPs) and diabetologists (SDs) was instrumental to the needs of patients; (d) optimize specialist treatment at the DUs; (e) optimize drug management; and (f) check whether organizational changes led to variations in clinical results. METHODS: This 6-stage study analyzed procedures, precoded actions, and recordable processes. Stage (1) Defining clinical and organizational endpoints; (2) Drafting flowcharts to describe the actions and work procedures implemented within each LHA; (3) Comparing the flowcharts with the data obtained from related literature; (4) Establishing a protocol shared with PCPs for the management and treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes; (5) Changing the procedures at the DUs; and (6) Evaluating the results. The data were assessed before and after establishing a shared protocol for SDs and PCPs (year 2009 vs 2011). RESULTS: The study shows inconsistencies in the organization of work in the 5 LHAs; however, collaboration with PCPs has guaranteed: (a) unchanged hemoglobin A1C values before and after applying the protocol; (b) a percentage increase in the number of patients with type 2 diabetes who were identified thanks to these protocols; (c) an increase in the use of biguanides compared to the preprotocol period; and (d) no change in the number of patients hospitalized because of acute complications from type 2 diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms how adequate collaboration between SDs and PCPs keeps the risk of complications stable. Nevertheless, shared protocols and clearly defined roles are required.