RESUMO
The demand for hospice services as well as for 'well-dying' of terminal patients is increasing as patient financial burden is decreasing due to National Health Insurance coverage for hospice care. Hospice institutions utilize interdisciplinary teams comprising doctors, nurses, dietitians, and other health staffs to provide comprehensive patient management. This report examined the nutritional status of a hospice patient from admission to death as well as the nutrition management of this patient in the hospice ward through nutrition interventions performed by a dietitian in the interdisciplinary team. The patient in the present case was a 74-year-old man diagnosed with pancreatic head cancer who died after 26 days of hospice care following transfer from the general ward. During hospice care, the dietitian monitored the patient's nutritional status and performed 8 nutrition interventions, but his oral intake decreased as the patient's symptoms worsened. The average energy intake rates were 30% and 17% of required rates for oral and artificial nutrition, respectively. In line with a report suggesting that the main focus of nutrition in palliative care should be on improving the quality of life and reducing worry in patients, rather than aggressive nutritional management, there is a need for nutrition interventions that are personalized to individual patients by monitoring progress and offering continuous counseling from the time of admission. In addition, further studies such as comparative analysis of nutritional management in Korean hospice ward will be needed for better nutrition management for terminally ill patients.
RESUMO
In the present study, we aimed to compare the results from nutritional risk screening based on nursing records with those using the Catholic Medical Center Nutritional Risk Screening (CMCNRS) tool. A cross-sectional study was performed involving 91 patients aged ≥ 18 years from an intensive care unit. We collected general characteristics of the patients and nutrition screening was conducted for each patient by using computerized hospital program for the nursing records as well as the CMCNRS conducted by clinical dietitians. The subjects were aged 64.0 ± 17.5 years, and 52 (57.1%) patients had a NPO (nothing by mouth) status. Neurological disease was the most common diagnosis (25.3%). Compared with the CMCNRS results from the clinical dietitians, the results for the nursing records had a sensitivity of 40.5% (95% CI 32.0-40.5) and a specificity of 100.0% (95% CI 92.8-100.0). The agreement was fair between the CMCNRS results obtained by clinical dietitians and the nursing records (k = 0.423). Analysis of the errors from the screening using the nursing records revealed significant differences for all subjective indicators (p < 0.001), compared with the CMCNRS by the clinical dietitians. Thus, after assessing the methods used for nutrition screening and the differences in the search results regarding malnourished status, we noted that the nursing records had a lower sensitivity than the screening by the CMCNRS.