Self-reported documentation of goals and outcomes of nutrition care - A cross-sectional survey study of Scandinavian dietitians.

BACKGROUND: The documentation of goals and outcomes of nutrition care in Electronic Health Records is insufficient making further exploration of this of particular interest. Identifying common features in documentation practice among Scandinavian dietitians might provide information that can support improvement in this area. AIMS: To explore the associations between clinical dietitians' self-reported documentation of patients' goals and outcomes and demographic factors, self-reported implementation of the systematic framework the Nutrition Care Process 4th step (NCP) and its associated terminology, and factors associated with the workplace. METHODS: Data from a cross-sectional study based on a previously tested web-based survey (INIS) disseminated in 2017 to dietitians in Scandinavia (n = 494) was used. Respondents were recruited through e-mail lists, e-newsletters and social media groups for dietitians. Associations between countries regarding the reported documentation of goals and outcomes, implementation levels of the NCP 4th step, demographic information and factors associated with the workplace were measured through Chi-square test. Associations between dependent- and independent variables were measured through logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Clinically practicing dietitians (n = 347) working in Scandinavia, Sweden (n = 249), Norway (n = 60), Denmark (n = 38), who had completed dietetic education participated. The reported documentation of goals and outcomes from nutrition intervention was highly associated with the reported implementation of NCP 4th step terminology (OR = 5.26; p = 0.009, OR = 3.56; p = 0.003), support from the workplace (OR = 4.0, p < 0.001, OR = 8.89, p < 0.001) and area of practice (OR = 2.02, p = 0.017). Years since completed dietetic training and educational level did not have any significant associations with documentation practice regarding goals and outcomes. CONCLUSION: Findings highlight strong associations between the implementation of the NCP 4th step terminology and the documentation of goals and outcomes. Strategies to support dietitians in using standardized terminology and the development of tools for comprehensive documentation of evaluation of goals and outcome are required.

Use of the Nutrition Care Process and Nutrition Care Process Terminology in an International Cohort Reported by an Online Survey Tool.

BACKGROUND: Dietitians in countries across the world have been implementing the Nutrition Care Process (NCP) and Terminology (NCPT) during the past decade. The implementation process has been evaluated in specific countries and in smaller international studies; however, no large international study comparing implementation between countries has been completed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe and compare the level of NCP/NCPT implementation across 10 countries. METHODS: A previously tested web-based survey was completed in 2017 by 6,719 dietitians across 10 countries. Participants were recruited through e-mail lists, e-newsletters, and social media groups for dietitians. Nondietitians were excluded through screening questions and targeted dissemination channels. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The main outcome of interest was the level of implementation of each of the four NCP steps. Differences in implementation between the NCP (process) and NCPT (terminology) were also measured. Differences between groups were assessed using Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U test. Multiple linear regression was used to assess relationships between the main outcomes and respondent demographic information. RESULTS: Australia, New Zealand, and the United States had higher implementation rates compared with other countries surveyed. Awareness of the NCP was high in most countries (>90%) but lower in Greece (50%). All countries had a higher implementation level of the NCP (process) compared with the NCPT (terminology). Dietitians working with inpatients reported the highest implementation levels while those working in public health reported the lowest. CONCLUSIONS: Dietitians in countries with more experience in NCP/NCPT implementation and a clear implementation strategy had higher levels of implementation. To achieve a successful NCP/NCPT implementation among dietitians, there is a need to promote the value of a standardized dietetic language together with the more easily implemented process. There is also a need to promote NCP/NCPT for all areas of practice, and develop strategic plans for implementation of the NCP and NCPT.