More-2-Eat implementation demonstrates that screening, assessment and treatment of malnourished patients can be spread and sustained in acute care; a multi-site, pretest post-test time series study.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition in medical and surgical inpatients is an on-going problem. More-2-Eat (M2E) Phase 1 demonstrated that improved detection and treatment of hospital malnutrition could be embedded into routine practice using an intensive researcher-facilitated implementation process. Yet, spreading and sustaining new practices in diverse hospital cultures with minimal researcher support is unknown. AIMS: To demonstrate that a scalable model of implementation can increase three key nutrition practices (admission screening; Subjective Global Assessment (SGA); and medication pass (MedPass) of oral nutritional supplement) in diverse acute care hospitals to detect and treat malnutrition in medical and surgical patients. METHODS: Ten hospitals participated in this pretest post-test time series implementation study from across Canada, including 21 medical or surgical units (Phase 1 original units (n = 4), Phase 1 hospital new units (n = 9), Phase 2 new hospitals and units (n = 8)). The scalable implementation model included: training champions on implementation strategies and providing them with education resources for teams; creating a self-directed audit and feedback process; and providing mentorship. Standardized audits of all patients on the study unit on an audit day were completed bi-monthly to track nutrition care activities since admission. Bivariate comparisons were performed by time period (initial, mid-term and final audits). Run-charts depicted the trajectory of change and qualitatively compared to Phase 1. RESULTS: 5158 patient charts were audited over the course of 18-months. Admission nutrition screening rates increased from 50% to 84% (p < 0.0001). New Phase 1 units more readily implemented screening than Phase 2 sites, and the original Phase 1 units generally sustained screening practices from Phase 1. SGA was a sustained practice at Phase 1 hospitals including in new Phase 1 units. The new Phase 2 units improved completion of SGA but did not reach the levels of Phase 1 units (original or new). MedPass almost doubled over the time periods (7%-13% of all patients p < 0.007). Other care practices significantly increased (e.g. volunteer mealtime assistance). CONCLUSION: Nutrition-care activities significantly increased in diverse hospital units with this scalable model. This heralds the transition from implementation research to sustained changes in routine practice. Screening, SGA, and MedPass can all be implemented, improve nutrition care for all patients, spread within an organization, and for the most part, sustained (and in the case of original Phase 1 units, for over 3 years) with champion leadership.

Improving the standard of nutrition care in hospital: Mealtime barriers reduced with implementation of the Integrated Nutrition Pathway for Acute Care.

BACKGROUND: Poor food intake is common in hospital patients and is associated with adverse patient and healthcare outcomes; diverse mealtime barriers to intake often undermine clinical nutrition care. AIM: This study determines whether implementation of locally adaptable nutrition care activities as part of uptake of the Integrated Nutrition Pathway for Acute Care (INPAC) reduced mealtime barriers and improved other patient outcomes (e.g. length of stay; LOS) when considering other covariates. METHODS: 1250 medical patients from 5 Canadian hospitals were recruited for this before-after time series design. Mealtime barriers were tallied with the Mealtime Audit Tool after a meal, while proportion of the meal consumed was assessed with the My Meal Intake Tool. Implementation of new standard care activities occurred over 12 months and three periods (pre-, early, and late) of implementation were compared. Regression analyses determined the effect of time period while adjusting for key covariates. RESULTS: Mealtime barriers were reduced over time periods (Period 1 = 2.5 S.D. 2.1; Period 3 = 1.8 S.D. 1.7) and site differences were noted. This decrease was statistically significant in regression analyses (-0.28 per time period; 95% CI -0.44, -0.11). Within and across site changes were also observed over time in meal intake and LOS; however, after adjusting for covariates, time period of implementation was not significantly associated with these outcomes. DISCUSSION: Mealtime barriers can be reduced and sustained by implementing improved standard care procedures for patients. The More-2-Eat study provides an example of how to implement changes in practice to support the prevention and treatment of malnutrition. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800304, June 7, 2016.

Comparing Hospital Staff Nutrition Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Before and 1 Year After Improving Nutrition Care: Results From the More-2-Eat Implementation Project.

BACKGROUND: Staff play key roles in the prevention, detection, and treatment of hospital malnutrition. Understanding staff knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) is important for developing and evaluating change management strategies. METHODS: The More-2-Eat project improved nutrition care in 5 Canadian hospitals by implementing the Integrated Nutrition Pathway for Acute Care (INPAC). To understand staff views before (T1) and after 1 year of implementation (T2), a reliable KAP questionnaire, based on INPAC, was administered. T2 included questions about involvement in implementation. The mean difference between T2 and T1 responses was calculated, and t tests were used for comparisons. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed at T1 (n = 189) and T2 (n = 147) (unpaired); 57 staff completed both questionnaires (paired). A significant increase in total score was seen in unpaired results at T2 (from 93.6/128 [range, 51-124] to 99.5/128 [range, 54-119]; t = 5.97, P < .0001), with an increase in knowledge/attitudes (KA) (t = 2.4, P = .016) and practice (t = 3.57, P < .0001) components. There were no statistically significant changes in paired responses. Seventy percent (n = 102/147) noticed positive changes in practices, 12% (n = 18) noticed positive/negative changes, 1% (n = 1) noticed negative change, and 17% (n = 25) noticed no change. Fifty-nine percent (n = 86) felt involved in the change, and these staff had higher KA and KAP scores than those who did not feel involved. CONCLUSION: Staff involvement is important in the implementation process for improving nutrition care.