Conectar
This scoping review aimed to identify and map the available information on the nutrition care process in older adults with delirium to analyse and summarise key concepts, and gaps, including the barriers and enablers to providing nutrition care for this group.
Scoping review.
This review was conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. Published and grey sources in English were considered.
Databases searched were CINAHL, Medline, Embase, JBI Evidence-based Practice, Scopus, ProQuest and Google. The initial search was conducted from October 2021 to March 2022 and repeated in October 2023.
The database search identified 1561 articles, 186 underwent full-text review and 17 articles were included. The grey literature search identified eight articles. Malnutrition and delirium were identified as mutually reinforcing, and nutrition strategies were included as part of multicomponent interventions for delirium management. There was no mention of barriers or enablers to nutrition care and minimal descriptive or empirical data available to guide nutrition care processes in this group.
This scoping review revealed a need for further research into nutrition care processes in older patients with delirium, in particular the barriers and enablers, to inform appropriate management strategies in this vulnerable group.
Providing nutrition care for older patients with delirium is important and further practical guidance could help patients, healthcare staff and families.
This scoping review yielded instructive data suggesting that delirium is an important risk factor for malnutrition and vice versa, which leads to poor patient and health service outcomes.
This scoping review adhered to relevant EQUATOR guidelines and used the Preferred Reporting Items For Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR).
No patient or public contribution.
To identify, describe and synthesise what is known about family carers' experiences and perspectives of engagement in delirium prevention and care for adults in hospital.
Systematic review and synthesis of qualitative evidence.
Comprehensive literature search within PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Central and PsycInfo databases to August 2022. Peer reviewed original qualitative research published in English.
Data were extracted using Covidence systematic review software. Methodological quality was reviewed against the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) Qualitative Checklist. Thematic synthesis was used to develop analytical themes. Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (GRADE-CERQual) framework was applied to findings.
Of 3429 records identified, 29 met criteria for final inclusion. Studies included a range of settings (intensive care, medical and surgical wards) and family carer types (spouse, daughter, parent and friend). Three primary themes Shared Caregiving, Partnership and Support, Communication for Shared Understanding and three cross-cutting contextual themes Care Transitions, Family Carer Context and Hospital Context were identified. Family carers have mixed experiences of involvement in delirium care and prevention. Family carer engagement in care impacted perceptions of care quality and their own self-efficacy. Where person-centred care expectations were not met, some family carers adopted compensatory or care contingency strategies. Information sharing and timely support from hospital staff who understood the carer context supported carer involvement. Supportive physical environments and addressing power imbalances allowed greater engagement.
Family carers often wish to be involved in delirium prevention and care, but need to be recognised as individuals, listened to, informed and supported to optimise their contribution.
The review findings can guide health professional and decision makers to optimise family carer involvement in delirium care programs.
PROSPERO [CRD42020221854].
ENTREQ.
No Patient or Public Contribution.
To gather and understand the experience of hospital mealtimes from the perspectives of those receiving and delivering mealtime care (older inpatients, caregivers and staff) using photovoice methods to identify touchpoints and themes to inform the co-design of new mealtime interventions.
This study was undertaken on acute care wards within a single metropolitan hospital in Brisbane, Australia in 2019. Photovoice methods involved a researcher accompanying 21 participants (10 older patients, 5 caregivers, 4 nurses and 2 food service officers) during a mealtime and documenting meaningful elements using photographs and field notes. Photo-elicitation interviews were then undertaken with participants to gain insight into their experience. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis, involving a multidisciplinary research team including a consumer.
Themes were identified across the three touchpoints: (1) preparing for the meal (the juggle, the anticipation), (2) delivering/receiving the meal (the rush, the clutter and the wait) and (3) experiencing the meal (the ideal, pulled away and acceptance). Despite a shared understanding of the importance of meals and shared vision of ‘the ideal’ mealtime, generally this was a time of tension, missed cares and dissatisfaction for staff, patients and caregivers. There was stark contrast in some aspects of mealtime experience, with simultaneous experiences of ‘the rush’ (staff) and ‘the wait’ (patients and caregivers). There was an overwhelming sense of acceptance and lack of control over change from all.
This study identified themes during hospital mealtimes which have largely gone unaddressed in the design of mealtime interventions to date. This research may provide a framework to inform the future co-design of mealtime interventions involving patients, caregivers and multidisciplinary staff, centred around these key touchpoints.
Mealtimes are experienced differently by patients, caregivers, nurses and food service officers across three key touchpoints: preparing for, delivering/receiving and experiencing the meal. Improving mealtime experiences therefore necessitates a collaborative approach, with co-designed mealtime improvement programs that include specific interventions focusing each touchpoint. Our data suggest that improvements could focus on reducing clutter, clarifying mealtime roles and workflows and supporting caregiver involvement.
Mealtimes are the central mechanism to meet patients' nutritional needs in hospital; however, research consistently shows that many patients do not eat enough to meet their nutritional requirements and that they often do not receive the mealtime assistance they require. Interventions to improve hospital mealtimes have, at best, shown only modest improvements in nutritional intake and mealtime care practices. Gaining deeper insight into the mealtime experience from multiple perspectives may identify new opportunities for improvement.
Patients, caregivers and staff have shared ideals of comfort, autonomy and conviviality at mealtimes, but challenges of complex teamwork and re-prioritisation of mealtimes in the face of prevailing power hierarchies make it difficult to achieve this ideal. There are three discrete touchpoints (preparing for, delivering/receiving and experiencing the meal) that require different approaches to improvement. Our data suggests a need to focus improvement on reducing clutter, clarifying mealtime roles and workflows and supporting caregivers.
The research provides a framework for multidisciplinary teams to begin co-designing improvements to mealtime care to benefit patients, caregivers and staff, while also providing a method for researchers to understand other complex care situations in hospital.
This manuscript is written in adherence with the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research.
Patients and caregivers were involved in the conception and design of the study through their membership of the hospital mealtime reference group. A consumer researcher (GP) was involved in the team to advise on study conduct (i.e. recruitment methods and information), data analysis (i.e. coding transcripts), data interpretation (i.e. review and refinement of themes) and manuscript writing (i.e. review and approval of final manuscript).
FreshRSS 