ABSTRACT
The state of nutrition education in medicine is inadequate, with nutrition-related topics being poorly integrated into lectures. Most medical students receive only a few contact hours of nutrition instruction during their entire time at medical school. Identifying potential barriers that may explain the paucity of nutritional knowledge in medical students is thus of paramount importance. The extent of nutrition coverage in the second part of Germany's nationwide medical licensing exam is currently unknown. We addressed this issue and assessed nutrition content, as well as students' scores, in this pivotal test prior to their graduation. We performed a post hoc analysis of six nationwide medical licensing examinations (2018-2020) undertaken by 29,849 medical students and screened 1920 multiple-choice questions for nutrition-related content. Nutrition-related questions accounted for a minority of the questions (2.1%, n = 40/1920). A considerable number of the questions (n = 19) included only a single nutrition-related answer option that was frequently incorrect and served as a distractor. About 0.5% of questions were entirely nutrition related. Despite undeniable barriers, the inclusion of additional nutrition-related examination questions could serve as an incentive to engage students and medical schools in enhancing medical nutrition education. The recently published competence-oriented learning objective catalog in Germany could play a pivotal role in this context, leading to better recognition of nutrition-related topics in medical education.
Subject(s)
Curriculum , Education, Medical , Humans , Nutritional Status , Health Education , Germany , Educational MeasurementABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The updated guidelines of the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) and for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) on nutrition in intensively treated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients recommend enteral nutrition (EN) instead of parenteral nutrition (PN) as the first-choice medical nutrition therapy. Despite this, PN remains the preferred route of nutrition administration in daily practice. The aim of this qualitative study was to gain insight into the patients' and hematology nurses' experiences and perceptions regarding nutritional problems and nutritional support and the reasons for the low adherence to the ESPEN/EBMT guidelines. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted in 23 patients from various Dutch hospitals who had completed intensive AML treatment. Interviews with 22 patients were audio-recorded and transcribed, one interview was summarized. The transcripts and summary were thematically analyzed using Atlas.ti. From each of the 22 Dutch hospitals providing intensive AML treatment, one hematology nurse participated in a telephone questionnaire survey. The results of this survey are presented in a descriptive way. RESULTS: Nutritional problems were a major source of distress in most participating patients. Nutritional support often led to peace of mind and less concerns, provided that there were no conflicting nutritional support practices among treating hospitals. Patients perceived PN and EN as a life-line and necessary for the prevention of or recovery from physical decline, but they also experienced loss of independence, limited mobility, fear of unwanted body weight gain and problems related to the feeding equipment. Both patients and hematology nurses regarded PN as an easy method of nutrition administration, while EN was often seen as a necessary evil or was even refused by patients, owing to tube-related physical discomfort and EN intolerance. Both patients' and hematology nurses' reluctance to administer EN proved to be barriers to the ESPEN/EBMT nutritional guideline adherence. Among the surveyed hematology nurses, barriers to adherence included personal factors related to their knowledge (lack of awareness) and attitudes (negative outcome expectancy and lack of agreement), guideline-related factors (lack of evidence) and external factors (lack of collaboration). CONCLUSION: Individualized nutritional support, including EN and PN, may reduce nutrition-related distress in intensively treated AML patients, provided that conflicting nutritional support practices among hospitals are avoided or explained. The barriers to adherence to the ESPEN/EBMT guidelines on EN and PN in this patient group may be reduced by enhancing hematology nurses' awareness and knowledge of the guidelines, incorporating the guidelines into multidisciplinary clinical pathways, improving outcome of EN by proper triage of patients eligible for EN and increasing the level of evidence of the guidelines.
Subject(s)
Hematology , Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute , Nurses , Humans , Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute/therapy , Nutritional Support/methods , Parenteral Nutrition/methodsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The level of adherence to the updated guidelines of The European Societies for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) and for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) on nutrition in intensively treated adult acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients in clinical practice is unknown. The aim of this nationwide survey was to investigate ESPEN/EBMT nutritional guideline adherence during intensive AML treatment, variation in nutrition support practices among hospitals and whether these practices changed after guideline publication. METHODS: All 22 Dutch hospitals providing (aftercare following) high-dose chemotherapy and/or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for adult AML patients were surveyed on nutrition support practices during these intensive AML treatments. We used an online questionnaire in 2015 and semi-structured telephone interviews in 2018-2019. Both surveys were completed by registered dieticians and addressed the use of enteral (EN) and parenteral (PN) nutrition. The ESPEN/EBMT nutritional guideline adherence was investigated through the telephone interviews. RESULTS: High-level ESPEN/EBMT guideline adherence and/or uniformity among hospitals regarding nutrition support practices during intensive AML treatment were observed for nutritional screening, -aims, safe food handling and exercise training. Adherence to ESPEN/EBMT recommendations that were not implemented into national guidelines, including nutritional assessment and use of medical nutrition, was poor. All hospitals assessed nutritional intake, -impact symptoms and body weight, but muscle mass, physical performance and degree of systemic inflammation were rarely and variably monitored. Although the number of hospitals using EN as first-choice nutritional intervention increased from 3 hospitals in 2015 to 8 in 2019, PN remained the preferred method of nutrition support. Furthermore, the timing of medical nutrition varied. CONCLUSIONS: Although the use of EN increased after publication of the updated ESPEN/EBMT nutritional guidelines, adherence to these standards was limited and there was heterogeneity in nutrition support practices during intensive AML treatment among hospitals. Incorporating international nutritional standards into national guidelines by nutrition expert groups immediately upon publication may improve adherence.