Malnutrition is highly prevalent among hospitalized patients, ranging from 30% to 50% depending on the patient population and the criteria used for diagnosis. Identifying early those who are malnourished and at risk of malnutrition and intervening at an early stage will improve patients overall prognosis and will reduce the costs to the state. Even though cardiac patients are at risk of malnutrition, data on the prevalence of malnutrition among cardiology inpatients is limited. The aim of the study was to assess malnutrition status of the newly admitted patients in a specialist cardiology institution in Sri Lanka by internationally recommended nutrition screening and assessment tools. During study period, 322 (61.22%) males and 204 (38.78%) females were recruited. Malnutrition status assessed by each screening tool had a wide variation. According to Mini Nutritional Assessment tool 69.6% were having possible malnutrition. Malnutrition Screening Tool 47.9% to be at risk of malnutrition. Subjective Global Assessments categorized only 4.2% as malnourished on the other hand Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool categorized 20.4% and 19.6% subjects as at medium risk and high risk of malnutrition respectively. Nutritional Risk Screening detected 6.3%, 25.1% and 24.9% patients to be mildly, moderately and severely malnourished respectively. Short Nutrition Assessment Questionnaire categorized 5.0% and 17.7% patients to be moderately malnourished and severely malnourished correspondingly. In conclusion, Although malnutrition was prevalent among this population, a wide variation in the nutritional status when assessed by widely used internationally recognized tools was observed.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/2193-1801-3-412) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundMisperception of body weight by individuals is a known occurrence. However, it is a potential target for implementing obesity reduction interventions in patients with cardiovascular and metabolic diseases. The aim of this study was to describe the association between self-perception of body weight and objectively measured body mass index (BMI) among cardiac patients in a specialist cardiology institution in Sri Lanka.MethodDuring the study period, 322 (61 %) males and 204 (39 %) females were recruited from consecutive admissions to the Institute of Cardiology, National Hospital, Colombo, Sri Lanka. An interviewer-administered questionnaire was used to assess demographic characteristics, medical records and body weight perception. Weight, height and waist circumference (WC) were measured and Asian anthropometric cut-off points for BMI and WC were applied.ResultsThe mean BMI of the study population was 23.61 kg/m2. Body size misperception was seen in a significant proportion of the cohort. 85.2 % of overweight patients reported themselves to be of ‘normal weight’ or even ‘underweight’. Moreover, 36 % of obese patients misperceived body weight as being of ‘normal weight’ while 10.9 % considered themselves to be ‘underweight’. 61.9 % of males and 68.8 % of females with central obesity reported themselves to be ‘underweight’ or ‘normal weight’. Among a subgroup with co-morbid metabolic diseases, significant under-perception of body size was seen.ConclusionsSignificant body size misperceptions were noted in this group of cardiac patients. The disparity of perception was seen increasingly with increasing BMI. More than two thirds of overweight and more than half of obese patients believed themselves to have normal or less than normal weight.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40608-016-0113-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundCardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and there is a rising global burden. The effects of diet on cardiometabolic risk factors have been studied extensively. Healthy eating as a cost-effective approach to risk reduction in post-myocardial infarction patients is proven to be beneficial, and the “plate model” is one of the practical methods to achieve this objective.Methods/designThe study will be conducted as a randomized, single-blind, controlled clinical trial for a period of 3 months. A total of 120 overweight (body mass index >23 kg/m2) inpatients (aged 20–70 years) with a history of troponin-positive acute coronary syndrome (ACS) within the 1 month preceding the study will be recruited. Simple randomization will be used in participant allocation. The intervention group will receive the model plate diet. The control group will be provided with routine dietary advice. Other domains, such as advice on exercise and lifestyle modification, will be equalized among patients in both the groups. The visits and evaluations will be done at recruitment (visit 0), 4 weeks, and 12 weeks after the intervention. The primary outcome will be a mean body weight reduction of 10%, and the secondary outcomes will include mean reduction of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, improvement of anthropometric parameters, and improvement of lipid profile and liver enzymes in the test group compared with the control group at 12 weeks following the plate model diet.DiscussionThis study protocol is designed to establish the effects of the plate model diet on modification of cardiometabolic risk factors in patients with ACS. This will also be a pioneering study designed to investigate the practicality of the model plate in local settings and in the South Asian region.Trial registrationSri Lanka Clinical Trials Registry identifier: SLCTR/2016/22. Registered on 22 September 2016 (http://www.slctr.lk/trials/483).Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2057-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Malnutrition is highly prevalent among hospital admissions and associated with, poor response to medical treatment, prolonged hospital stay, increased mortality and cost to the state.

No abstract