The Contribution of Registered Dietitians in the Management of Hyperemesis Gravidarum in the United Kingdom.

Hyperemesis Gravidarum (HG) is a condition at the extreme end of the pregnancy sickness spectrum, which can cause poor oral intake, malnutrition, dehydration and weight loss. The aim of this study is to explore the role of Registered Dietitians (RD) in the management of HG in the United Kingdom (UK). A survey was designed and distributed electronically to members of the British Dietetic Association. There were 45 respondents, 76% (n = 34) worked in secondary care hospitals, 11% (n = 5) were in maternal health specialist roles. The most commonly used referral criteria was the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (40%, n = 18), followed by second admission (36%, n = 16). However 36% (n = 16) reported no specific referral criteria. About 87% (n = 37) of respondents did not have specific clinical guidelines to follow. Oral nutrition supplements were used by 73% (n = 33) either 'sometimes' or 'most of the time'. Enteral and parenteral nutrition were less commonly used. There was an inconsistent use of referral criteria to dietetic services and a lack of specific clinical guidelines and patient resources. Further training for all clinicians and earlier recognition of malnutrition, alongside investment in the role of dietitians were recommended to improve the nutritional care of those with HG.

Perioperative nutrition for the treatment of bladder cancer by radical cystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Radical cystectomy (RC) is the primary surgical treatment for muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. This major operation is typically associated with an extended hospital stay, a prolonged recovery period and potentially major complications. Nutritional interventions are beneficial in some people with other types of cancer and may be of value in this setting too. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of perioperative nutrition in people undergoing radical cystectomy for the treatment of bladder cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases (Evidence Based Medicine Reviews, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, CINAHL), trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings published up to 22 February 2019, with no restrictions on the language or status of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults undergoing RC for bladder cancer. The intervention was any perioperative nutrition support. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the quality of evidence using GRADE. Primary outcomes were postoperative complications at 90 days and length of hospital stay. The secondary outcome was mortality up to 90 days after surgery. When 90-day outcome data were not available, we reported 30-day data. MAIN RESULTS: The search identified eight trials including 500 participants. Six trials were conducted in the USA and two in Europe.1. Parenteral nutrition (PN) versus oral nutrition: based on one study with 157 participants, PN may increase postoperative complications within 30 days (risk ratio (RR) 1.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.82; low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of evidence for serious study limitations (unclear risk of selection, performance and selective reporting bias) and serious imprecision. This corresponds to 198 more complications per 1000 participants (95% CI 35 more to 405 more). Length of hospital stay may be similar (mean difference (MD) 0.5 days higher, CI not reported; low-quality evidence).2. Immuno-enhancing nutrition versus standard nutrition: based on one study including 29 participants, immuno-enhancing nutrition may reduce 90-day postoperative complications (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.23; low-quality evidence). These findings correspond to 322 fewer complications per 1000 participants (95% CI 429 fewer to 107 more). Length of hospital stay may be similar (MD 0.20 days, 95% CI 1.69 lower to 2.09 higher; low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of evidence of both outcomes for very serious imprecision.3. Preoperative oral nutritional support versus normal diet: based on one study including 28 participants, we are very uncertain if preoperative oral supplements reduces postoperative complications. We downgraded quality for serious study limitations (unclear risk of selection, performance, attrition and selective reporting bias) and very serious imprecision. The study did not report on length of hospital stay.4. Early postoperative feeding versus standard postoperative management: based on one study with 102 participants, early postoperative feeding may increase postoperative complications (very low-quality evidence) but we are very uncertain of this finding. We downgraded the quality of evidence for serious study limitations (unclear risk of selection and performance bias) and very serious imprecision. Length of hospital stay may be similar (MD 0.95 days less, CI not reported; low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of evidence for serious study limitations (unclear risk of selection and performance bias) and serious imprecision.5. Amino acid with dextrose versus dextrose: based on two studies with 104 participants, we are very uncertain whether amino acids reduce postoperative complications (very low-quality evidence). We are also very uncertain whether length of hospital stay is similar (very low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of evidence for both outcomes for serious study limitations (unclear and high risk of selection bias; unclear risk of performance, detection and selective reporting bias), serious indirectness related to the patient population and very serious imprecision.6. Branch chain amino acids versus dextrose only: based on one study including 19 participants, we are very uncertain whether complication rates are similar (very low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of evidence for serious study limitations (unclear risk of selection, performance, detection, attrition and selective reporting bias), serious indirectness related to the patient population and very serious imprecision. The study did not report on length of hospital stay.7. Perioperative oral nutritional supplements versus oral multivitamin and mineral supplement: based on one study with 61 participants, oral supplements compared to a multivitamin and mineral supplement may slightly decrease postoperative complications (low-quality evidence). These findings correspond to 135 fewer occurrences per 1000 participants (95% CI 256 fewer to 65 more). Length of hospital stay may be similar (low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of evidence of both outcomes for study limitations and imprecision. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on few, small and dated studies, with serious methodological limitations, we found limited evidence for a benefit of perioperative nutrition interventions. We rated the quality of evidence as low or very low, which underscores the urgent need for high-quality research studies to better inform nutritional support interventions for people undergoing surgery for bladder cancer.

Perioperative nutrition interventions for women with ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Women with ovarian cancer have been shown to be at significant risk of malnutrition with incidence rates described as being between 28% to 67%. Nutrition interventions may improve clinical outcomes positively, nutritional status or quality of life measures in this patient group. OBJECTIVES: This review was conducted to assess the effects of nutrition interventions during the perioperative period for women with ovarian cancer. SEARCH METHODS: Electronic searches were conducted of the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2012, Issue 7), Medline (1946 to July week 4 2012), Embase (1980 to 2012 week 31), DARE (to 7th August 2012) AMED (1985 to April 2012), BNI (1992 to April 2012), CINAHL (to April 2012). We also searched trials databases, conference proceedings and related citation lists. Reference listings were handsearched. No restrictions were applied on language or date. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which women 18 years and over with any stage of ovarian cancer, including recurrent cancer, were in the perioperative phase of treatment and received any type of nutrition intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Titles and abstracts were screened by two review authors with study selection discussed by a team. Pairs of review authors worked independently on data collection and compared findings. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 4092 titles were screened and 14 full text reports reviewed; a single small study met the inclusion criteria. In the included RCT, 40 women (35 with ovarian cancer) had extensive elective surgery including bowel resection for treatment of gynaecological malignancy. Randomisation was made to either early oral feeding (oral fluids in the first 24 hours, solid foods on the following day) or to a 'traditional' feeding regimen where oral fluids and foods were delayed until there was evidence of bowel function. Most women in the early feeding group (14/18) were able to resume eating solid food one day after surgery. This resulted in a significantly shorter hospital stay with no increase in postoperative complications or change in quality of life measures in comparison with the women on the 'traditional' feeding regimen. The incidence of nausea and vomiting during the postoperative stay was similar in both groups and was noted in slightly more than half of the women. Overall survival was evaluated until 30 days following discharge from hospital; in this period, there was one death of a woman who had been in the 'traditional oral feeding' group, cause of death was not noted. We assessed risk of bias and found no high risk of bias was identified in the methodology and reporting of the included study, although there was an increased risk of bias due to the small size of the study in which not all of the women had ovarian cancer. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Although women with ovarian cancer have been shown to be at risk of malnutrition, there is a lack of evidence derived from RCTs evaluating the identification, assessment and treatment of malnutrition during the perioperative phase of treatment. There is evidence from one small study that some women with ovarian cancer undergoing surgery with associated bowel resection may safely commence oral fluids within 24 hours of surgery and solid foods on the following day. Further research is required, including a RCT, to generate guidance concerning the treatment of malnutrition in this patient group.