Predictive validity of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics/American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition indicators to diagnose malnutrition tool in hospitalized adults: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The lack of a widely accepted, broadly validated tool for diagnosing malnutrition in hospitalized patients limits the ability to assess the integral role of nutrition as an input and outcome of health, disease, and treatment. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the predictive validity of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics/American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) indicators to diagnose malnutrition (AAIM) tool and determine if it can be simplified. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted from August 2019 to September 2022 with 32 hospitals in United States. At baseline, 290 adult patients were evaluated for a diagnosis of malnutrition using the AAIM tool, which assesses weight loss, inadequate energy intake, subcutaneous fat and muscle loss, edema, and hand grip strength. Healthcare outcomes were extracted from the medical record: composite incidence of emergency department (ED) visits and hospital readmissions within 90 d postdischarge; length of hospital stay (LOS); and Medicare Severity Disease Related Group (MS-DRG) relative weight (i.e., healthcare resource utilization). We used multilevel, multivariable negative binomial or generalized linear regression models to evaluate relationships between malnutrition diagnosis and healthcare outcomes. RESULTS: After adjusting for disease severity and acuity and sociodemographic characteristics, individuals diagnosed with severe malnutrition had a higher incidence rate of ED visits and hospital readmissions (incidence rate ratio: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.14, 3.13; P = 0.01), and individuals diagnosed with moderate malnutrition had a 25.2% longer LOS (95% CI: 2.0%, 53.7%; P = 0.03) and 15.1% greater healthcare resource utilization (95% CI: 1.6%, 31.9%; P = 0.03) compared with individuals with no malnutrition diagnosis. Observed relationships remained consistent when only considering malnutrition diagnoses supported by at least 2 of these indicators: weight loss, subcutaneous fat loss, muscle wasting, and inadequate energy intake. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this multihospital study confirm the predictive validity of the original or simplified AAIM tool and support its routine use for hospitalized adult patients. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03928548 (https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT03928548).

Completion of a Nutrition-Focused Physical Exam with hospitalized adults and pediatric patients: Secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Nutrition-Focused Physical Exam (NFPE) feasibility is not well-studied. We describe registered dietitian nutritionist (RDN)-reported NFPE completion for hospitalized adult and pediatric patients overall and by assessment parameters. METHODS: Trained RDNs systematically conducted NFPEs for hospitalized adult and pediatric patients during the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics and American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition Indicators to diagnose Malnutrition multisite cohort study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03928548). RDNs reported their ability to evaluate assessment sites for subcutaneous fat and muscle loss, fluid accumulation, and micronutrient status and to complete handgrip strength (adults and children ≥6 years) and mid-upper arm circumference measurements (children). RDNs noted if they could complete the full NFPE; if not, they noted challenges. We descriptively summarized results and used multilevel logistic regression models to examine relationships between patient characteristics and NFPE completion. RESULTS: RDNs from 39 adult and 29 pediatric US hospitals conducted NFPEs for 327 adults and 214 children aged 1 month to 17.9 years. RDNs reported completing the examination for 44% (n = 145) of adults and 15% (n = 33) of children. They successfully evaluated 25 of 27 and 19 of 26 unique NFPE components in >80% of adults and children, respectively. Common reasons the full NFPE was not completed were limited mobility in adults and patient refusal in children. RDNs had lower odds of completing NFPEs in adults with lower vs higher education levels or higher vs lower nutrition complexity and in younger vs older children. CONCLUSION: RDNs evaluated NFPE components for a high proportion (>80%) of hospitalized patients.

Factors Associated with IRB Review Time in a Non-Federally Funded Study Using an sIRB of Record.

From 2018 to 2020, U.S. federal mandates began requiring the use of a single institutional review board (sIRB) of record for federally funded, multisite studies. With an interest in the efficiency of site activation, we compared the frequency with which local review and approval and three different reliance options (ways to establish a reliance agreement between the sIRB and the relying institution) were used during this period in a multisite, non-federally funded study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03928548). Using general linear models, we analyzed the relationships between local reliance or approval and sIRB of record approval times and (a) the regulatory option selected and (b) relying-site and process characteristics. Eighty-five sites received sIRB approval through 72 submissions (40% using local review, 46% using the SMART IRB agreement, 10% using an IRB authorization agreement, and 4% using a letter of support). Median time to establish a local reliance or study approval and sIRB approval were longest for sites using a SMART IRB agreement. Study-site region and the time of submission were significantly associated with local reliance or approval time, which averaged 129 and 107 days faster for Midwestern (p = 0.03) or Western (p = 0.02) sites, respectively, and 70 days slower for Northeastern sites (p = 0.42) compared with sites in the South, and 91 days slower when regulatory communication was initiated during or after February 2019 compared with before (p = 0.02). Similar relationships between sIRB approval time and region and time frame were observed; in addition, approval time was 103 days slower for sites affiliated with a research 1 (R1) university versus not (p = 0.02). Region of the country, time frame, and R1 university affiliation were associated with variations in study-site activation in a non-federally funded, multisite study.

Documentation of the evidence-diagnosis link predicts nutrition diagnosis resolution in the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics' diabetes mellitus registry study: A secondary analysis of Nutrition Care Process outcomes.

Objectives: To describe nutrition care documentation patterns and investigate predictors of nutrition diagnosis resolution. Methods: This is a secondary data analysis of a 2-year pragmatic, quasi-experimental study conducted in outpatient clinics where nutrition care was provided to adults with diabetes Type 1 or 2 from May 2017 to June 2019 (n = 564 patients). The main outcome measures were frequency of standardized Nutrition Care Process (NCP) terms, NCP links, nutrition diagnosis resolution and predictors of nutrition diagnosis resolution. Predictors of diagnosis resolution were identified using a multivariable logistic regression model. Results: The most prevalent resolved diagnoses were excessive carbohydrate intake (32%), undesirable food choices (21%) and excessive energy intake (13%). The top etiology was food and nutrition related knowledge deficit (57%) and interventions were drawn mainly from the Nutrition Education domain (64%). One hundred forty-six patient cases (26%) had at least one follow-up visit and 26% of those with a follow-up (n = 38) had a resolved diagnosis. The presence of the evidence-diagnosis NCP link in documentation predicted diagnosis resolution (OR = 2.80, 95% CI 1.30-6.02; p = 0.008). Conclusion: Most diagnoses were caused by patients' lack of knowledge and respective interventions focused on nutrition education. Odds of diagnosis resolution improved when the signs and symptoms of the diagnosis were documented during assessment (evidence-diagnosis NCP link). Training dietitians on NCP links may be important to resolve nutrition diagnoses. Presented findings are hypothesis generating.

A quasi-experimental study provides evidence that registered dietitian nutritionist care is aligned with the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics evidence-based nutrition practice guidelines for type 1 and 2 diabetes.

Background: One previous study examined implementation of evidence-based nutrition practice guidelines (EBNPG). Objectives: To describe alignment of registered dietitian nutritionists' (RDNs) documented nutrition care with the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics' EBNPG for Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes and examine impact of a midpoint training on care alignment with the guideline. Methods: In this 2-year, quasi-experimental study, 19 RDNs providing outpatient medical nutrition therapy to adults with diabetes (n = 562) documented 787 initial and follow-up encounters. At study midpoint, RDNs received a guideline content training. A validated, automated tool was used to match standardized nutrition care process terminology (NCPT) in the documentation to NCPT expected to represent guideline implementation. A congruence score ranging from 0 (recommendation not identified) to 4 (recommendation fully implemented) was generated based on matching. Multilevel linear regression was used to examine pre-to-post training changes in congruence scores. Results: Most patients (~75%) had only one documented RDN encounter. At least one guideline recommendation was fully implemented in 67% of encounters. The recommendations "individualize macronutrient composition" and "education on glucose monitoring" (partially or fully implemented in 85 and 79% of encounters, respectively) were most frequently implemented. The mean encounter congruence scores were not different from pre-to-post guideline training (n = 19 RDNs, 519 encounters pre-training; n = 14 RDNs, 204 encounters post-training; ß = -0.06, SE = 0.04; 95% CI: -0.14, 0.03). Conclusions: Most RDN encounters had documented evidence that at least one recommendation from the EBNPG was implemented. The most frequently implemented recommendations were related to improving glycemic control. A midpoint guideline training had no impact on alignment of care with the guideline.

Evaluating the Implementation of Evidence-based Kidney Nutrition Practice Guidelines: The AUGmeNt Study Protocol.

Evidence-based nutrition practice guidelines (EBNPGs) inform registered dietitian nutritionist (RDN) care for patients with chronic kidney disease grade 5 treated by dialysis; however, there has been little evaluation of best practices for implementing EBNPGs. In this effectiveness-implementation hybrid study with a quasi-experimental design, United States RDNs in hemodialysis clinics will document initial and follow-up nutrition care for patients with chronic kidney disease grade 5 treated by dialysis using the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Health Informatics Infrastructure before and after being randomly assigned to a training model: (1) EBNPG knowledge training or (2) EBNPG knowledge training plus an implementation toolkit. The aims of the study include examining congruence of RDN documentation of nutrition care with the EBNPG; describing common RDN-reported EBNPG acceptability, adoption, and adaptation issues; and determining the feasibility of estimating the impact of RDN care on nutrition-related patient outcomes. The AUGmeNt study can inform effective development and implementation of future EBNPGs. Keywords: Chronic kidney diseases; medical nutrition therapy; implementation science; clinical practice guideline; nutrition care process terminology; dietitian.

Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Nutrition Research Network: Validation of a Novel Nutrition Informatics Tool to Assess Agreement Between Documented Nutrition Care and Evidence-Based Recommendations.

More evidence regarding registered dietitian nutritionist implementation of evidence-based nutrition practice guidelines (EBNPGs) is needed. We assessed the utility of an automated informatics tool to evaluate congruence of documented nutrition care with 13 individual recommendations in the diabetes mellitus (DM) EBNPG and with the guideline overall. A concurrent validation study was conducted using Nutrition Care Process Terminology documentation entered in the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Health Informatics Infrastructure by registered dietitian nutritionists caring for patients with DM. A 15% subset (n = 115) of the 790 patient encounters recorded were selected randomly, and the documented care was evaluated using the automated DM Expected Care Plan (ECP) Analyzer and expert audit. Recommendation-level congruence, as determined by each method, was compared using Cohen's κ analysis, and the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the DM ECP Analyzer for assessing overall guideline-level congruence was calculated with expert audits as the "gold standard." For recommendation-level congruence, the DM ECP Analyzer identified more instances of recommendation implementation in the patient encounters, and classified more encounters as including partial or full recommendation implementation for 10 of the 13 recommendations, compared with the expert audit. There was slight to fair agreement between the DM ECP and the expert audit for most individual recommendations, with a mean ± standard deviation level of agreement of κ = .17 ± .19 across all eligible recommendations. At the guideline level, the DM Analyzer had high accuracy (98.3%) and sensitivity (99.1%) and low specificity (0%; no true negatives detected). The DM ECP Analyzer is acceptable for conducting automated audits of nutrition documentation to assess congruence of documented care with recommendations for evidence-based care. Future changes to the EBNPG, Nutrition Care Process Terminology, Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Health Informatics Infrastructure, and the DM ECP Analyzer could potentially improve recommendation-level performance. The DM ECP Analyzer can be modified for other EBNPGs to facilitate automated assessment of guideline implementation.

Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Nutrition Research Network: Rationale and Protocol for a Study to Validate the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics/American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition Consensus-Derived Diagnostic Indicators For Adult And Pediatric Malnutrition and to Determine Optimal Registered Dietitian Nutritionist Staffing in Acute Care Hospital Settings.

No systematic, universally accepted method of diagnosing malnutrition in hospitalized patients exists, which may contribute to underdiagnosis, undertreatment, and poorer patient outcomes. To address this issue, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics is conducting a cohort study to: assess the predictive validity of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics/American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition indicators for the diagnosis of adult and pediatric malnutrition in hospital settings; assess the interrater reliability of the indicators for the diagnosis of adult and pediatric malnutrition; and quantify the level of registered dietitian nutritionist care needed to improve patient outcomes. Up to 60 adult and 60 pediatric hospital sites will collect data to estimate level of registered dietitian nutritionist care, along with patient medical history and Malnutrition Screening Tool (adult) or STRONGkids (pediatric) results. A subset of 600 adult and 600 pediatric patients (∼1:1 screened as high- or low-risk for malnutrition) will be randomly selected for the indicators for the diagnosis of adult and pediatric malnutrition and Nutrition Focused Physical Exam data collection; 100 adult and 100 pediatric patients in this group will also undergo a bioelectrical impedance analysis measurement. Additional nutrition care and medical outcomes (eg, mortality and length of stay) will be collected for a 3-month period after the initial nutrition encounter. Multilevel linear, logistic, Poisson, or Cox regression models will be used to assess indicators for the diagnosis of adult and pediatric malnutrition validity and registered dietitian nutritionist staffing levels as appropriate for each medical outcome. Validation results will allow US clinicians to standardize the way they diagnose malnutrition in hospitalized patients, and the staffing data will support advocacy for available registered dietitian nutritionist-delivered malnutrition treatment to improve patient outcomes.