What outcome measures do Australian dietitians use to evaluate nutrition education interventions with individual patients?

Minimum reporting standards for process and outcomes assessments for private practice dietitians working in Australian primary care: The Thought Leader Consensus study

AIM

To identify minimum reporting standards for assessing the processes and outcomes of Australian primary care dietetics practice.

METHODS

A sequential, mixed-method, exploratory process with peer-nominated Australian 'thought leaders'. A literature review was undertaken to identify possible standards, followed by semi-structured qualitative interviews with thought leaders. Content analysis was used to identify a comprehensive group of items that could inform evidence-based reporting standards. Two rounds of a modified Delphi survey were conducted with the same thought leaders to seek consensus on the most relevant items. Individual items were analysed for content validity, and those with a rating of excellent item-content validity (index >0.78) were included as evidenced-based standards for primary care practice.

RESULTS

Twenty-six thought leaders (response rate: 87%) from all mainland Australian states completed a qualitative interview and two rounds of modified-Delphi consensus surveys. Items were identified and categorised into three domains: business, clinical, and implementation. Content analysis identified 216 items published or used in practice by the thought leaders. After two rounds of consensus review, 97 items (45 business, 33 clinical, and 19 implementation) achieved excellent consensus ratings. Combining these items into a standardised tool, the scale-content validity index average was >0.90, which is considered excellent content validity.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has identified minimum reporting standards for evidence-based process and outcome assessments in primary care dietetics practice in Australia. Incorporating such standards into a standardised tool could enable benchmarking across the dietetics workforce and contribute to a broader understanding of the dietetic impact on public health.

Monitoring/Evaluation in Nutritional Therapy for People with Gastrointestinal Complaints: Online Survey with Dietitians

Introduction Dietary interventions are part of the therapy approach in gastrointestinal disorders. However, guidance on what outcomes to assess (in the form of a core outcome set) for dietitians to demonstrate the effectiveness of their interventions is lacking. This study provides preliminary work for the development of a core outcome set to systematically assess outcomes of nutrition therapy in clients with gastrointestinal complaints by examining how monitoring/evaluation are conducted by dietitians.

Methods This is a quantitative online survey for dietitians to assess the current situation around the globe concerning monitoring and evaluation. An online survey with 26 questions divided into six sections (rated importance, implementation, resources/obstacles, instrument requirements, statistical questions and experiences with the Nutrition Care Process) was developed. The questionnaire was available in English, French and German.

Results In total 740 responses were analysed. Monitoring/evaluation of clients with gastrointestinal symptoms was rated by 98% to be quite important to very important. The systematic implementation of monitoring and evaluation according to a concept/model was rated by 57% as 'rather often' to 'very often/always'.

Conclusion Dietitians are aware of the importance of the measurability of dietetic interventions. The most dominant barriers are lacking time in daily practice and lack of a suitable monitoring/evaluation instrument. A suitable core outcome set in the field of gastrointestinal complaints is needed to increase systematic monitoring/evaluation.

Patient-Reported Outcome and Experience Measures Administered by Dietitians in the Outpatient Setting: Systematic Review

Understanding how patients perceive their health and the experience with the dietitian is fundamental to providing patient-centred care. The types of patient reported measures (PRMs) used by outpatient dietitians is unclear. Guidance about use of PRMs for dietitians is also lacking. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise evidence regarding the use of PRMs by dietitians in the outpatient setting and evaluate the methodological quality of studies evaluating the psychometric properties of PRMs. Eight databases were searched systematically for studies of dietitians working in the outpatient setting and administering a PRM. Forty-four studies were evaluated and described 58 different PRMs. These included direct nutrition related (n = 12 studies), clinical (n = 21 studies), and health-related quality of life PRMs (n = 24 studies); 1 study documented use of a patient-reported experience measure. A large range of PRMs are used by outpatient dietitians. Of the most common PRMs, the majority are administered in similar populations to the original validation study. Dietitians should use a combination of 3 PRMs: a generic health-related quality of life tool, an experience measure, and at least 1 clinical or direct nutrition-related measure. This will enable dietitians to fully capture the impact of their care on patients.

Perceptions of private practice dietitians regarding the collection and use of outcomes data in primary healthcare practices: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Dietitians working in private practices in primary settings provide nutrition care to support individuals with the prevention and management of chronic disease. A better understanding of the type and usage of data collected by dietitians in this setting may provide insights to optimise the effectiveness and impact of the workforce. The present study explored the perceptions of leading Australian private practice dietitians on the collection and usage of data in their practice.

METHODS

A qualitative descriptive study of Australian private practice dietitians, recruited by snowball sampling, was conducted on their perceptions and attitudes towards collecting and using data. Data were collected by semi-structured interviews and all interview data were thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Twenty-three dietitians participated. Five themes emerged: (i) collecting data is challenging, nuanced, unclearly defined and therefore not routinely carried out; (ii) consistent data collection processes are impeded by the diversity of practise and practices; (iii) business-related data collection is essential for sustainable dietetic services; (iv) clinical outcomes are fundamental to dietetic services; and (v) standardised, integrated systems are needed to enable routine data collection and synthesis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate the rudimentary role business acumen has in practice viability and provides evidence to potentially re-shape the future of dietetic education in Australia. Private practice dietitians may benefit from tools and training that enable consistent collection of data about their services. Such data could enable benchmarking across the workforce and contribute to a broader understanding of dietetic impact on public health.

Identifying and Managing Malnutrition, Frailty and Sarcopenia in the Community: A Narrative Review

Malnutrition, frailty and sarcopenia are becoming increasingly prevalent among community-dwelling older adults; yet are often unidentified and untreated in community settings. There is an urgent need for community-based healthcare professionals (HCPs) from all disciplines, including medicine, nursing and allied health, to be aware of, and to be able to recognise and appropriately manage these conditions. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of malnutrition, frailty and sarcopenia in the community, including their definitions, prevalence, impacts and causes/risk factors; and guidance on how these conditions may be identified and managed by HCPs in the community. A detailed description of the care process, including screening and referral, assessment and diagnosis, intervention, and monitoring and evaluation, relevant to the community context, is also provided. Further research exploring the barriers/enablers to delivering high-quality nutrition care to older community-dwelling adults who are malnourished, frail or sarcopenic is recommended, to inform the development of specific guidance for HCPs in identifying and managing these conditions in the community.