Moderation of a foodservice assessment artefact in nutrition and dietetics programs.

AIM: Foodservice is a key component of dietetics education and practice internationally yet benchmarks for competency are limited. This study sought to review and moderate an assessment artefact of foodservice work integrated learning (WIL) to develop a shared understanding of one tool which may be used in a suite of evidence to demonstrate competence. METHODS: The foodservice curricula and assessment artefacts were described for the foodservice program at each of four participating universities. An assessment artefact from WIL, the report, was identified as an indicator of foodservice competence common to each program. Each university provided four purposively sampled WIL reports, assessed in duplicate by two academics from other participating universities using the corresponding university assessment rubric. Collated assessment results, along with the original assessment, were presented back to assessors. A semi-structured group discussion explored variations in assessment results, factors influencing decisions, and potential changes needed for assessment documentation. RESULTS: There was variation in assessment outcomes between independent assessors. In some instances assessors did not consistently deliver the same assessment outcome, nor rank students in sequential order of performance. This variation was less where an absolute ranking of satisfactory/unsatisfactory was applied. The assessor discussion revealed three key concepts: importance of understanding the project scope; challenges which influence assessment decision making; importance of understanding the broader program of assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment inconsistencies emphasise the importance of multiple assessors and assessment artefacts across a programmatic assessment model, and the need for a clear understanding of competence in nutrition and dietetics.

Identifying Malnutrition in an Elderly Ambulatory Rehabilitation Population: Agreement between Mini Nutritional Assessment and Validated Screening Tools.

Malnutrition is common in older adults and often goes unrecognised and untreated. Australian evidence-based guidelines for the management of malnutrition indicate that only the Mini Nutritional Assessment short form (MNA-sf) and Rapid Screen are recommended for use as malnutrition screening tools in the rehabilitation setting. The aim of this secondary analysis was to assess the validity and reliability of two malnutrition screening tools, validated in other adult sub-groups, in a rehabilitation population aged ≥60 years. The Council on Nutrition Appetite Questionnaire (CNAQ) and the Simplified Nutritional Appetite Questionnaire (SNAQ), were completed by 185 ambulatory rehabilitation patients (48% male; median age 78 years) and results compared to the full MNA as a reference technique. Prevalence of risk of malnutrition was 63% according to the MNA. For identification of risk of malnutrition the CNAQ had sensitivity of 54%, specificity 81%, positive predictive value 83% and negative predictive value 51%, compared to 28%, 94%, 89% and 44%, respectively, using SNAQ. Assessment of reliability indicated significant slight to fair agreement between MNA with CNAQ (κ = 0.309, p < 0.001) and SNAQ (κ = 0.176, p < 0.001). Neither the CNAQ nor the SNAQ have a high level of validity or reliability in this elderly population and are therefore not recommended for use in the ambulatory rehabilitation setting. Further work is necessary to assess the validity and reliability of other malnutrition screening tools to establish their usefulness in this population.