This study supports the contention that a dining room environment can increase food intake, increase patients' opportunities to enjoy the social aspect of meal times, and potentially lead to weight gain and reduced malnutrition risk in the rehabilitation setting.

No abstract

Background: Perioperative nutrition support is recommended for patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer surgery; however, limited evidence exists regarding implementation of a nutrition care pathway in clinical practice. The aims of this pilot study were to determine whether implementation of a standardised perioperative nutrition pathway for patients undergoing UGI cancer surgery improves access to dietetics care, as well as to evaluate study feasibility, fidelity, resource requirements and effect on clinical outcomes. Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed UGI cancer from four major metropolitan hospitals in Melbourne, planned for curative intent surgery, were included in the prospective pilot study (n = 35), with historical controls (n = 35) as standard care. Outcomes were dietetics care (dietetics contacts) nutritional status, hand grip strength, weight change, preoperative hospital admissions, complications and length of stay, recruitment feasibility, fidelity and adherence, and resource requirements. Continuous data were analysed using independent samples t test accounting for unequal variances or a Mann-Whitney U test. Dichotomous data were analysed using Fisher's exact test. Results: The percentage of participants receiving preoperative dietetic intervention increased from 55% to 100% (p < 0.001). Mean ± SD dietetics contacts increased from 2.2 ± 3.7 to 5.9 ± 3.9 (p < 0.001). Non-statistically significant decreases in preoperative nutrition-related hospital admissions, and surgical complications were demonstrated in patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy. Recruitment rate was 81%, and adherence to the nutrition pathway was high (> 70% for all stages of the pathway). The mean ± SD estimated resource requirement for the preoperative period was 3.7 ± 2.8 h per patient. Conclusions: Implementation of this standardised nutrition pathway resulted in improved access to dietetics care. Recruitment feasibility and high fidelity to the intervention suggest that a larger study would be viable.

Background Implementation studies of complex interventions such as nutrition care pathways are important to health services research, as they support translation of research into practice. There is limited research regarding implementation of a nutrition care pathway in an upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer population. The aim of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the implementation process of a perioperative nutrition care pathway in UGI cancer surgery using The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Methods This was a mixed methods implementation study conducted during a pilot study of a standardised nutrition care pathway across four major hospitals between September 2018 to August 2019. Outcome measures included five focus groups among study dietitians (n = 4–8 per group), and quantitative satisfaction surveys from multi-disciplinary team (MDT) members (n = 14) and patients (n = 18). Focus group responses were analysed thematically using the CFIR constructs, which were used as a priori codes. Survey responses were summarised using means and standard deviations. A convergent parallel mixed methods approach according to CFIR domains and constructs was used to integrate qualitative and quantitative data. Results Qualitative data demonstrated that dietitian perceptions primarily aligned with five CFIR constructs (networks and communications, structural characteristics, adaptability, compatibility and patient needs/resources), indicating a complex clinical and implementation environment. Challenges to implementation mostly related to adapting the pathway, and the compatibility of nutrition coordination to existing aspects of care within each setting. Identified benefits from dietitian qualitative data and MDT survey responses included increased engagement between the dietitian and MDT, and a more proactive approach to nutrition care. Patients were highly satisfied with the service, with the majority of survey items being rated highly (≥4 of a possible 5 points). Conclusions The nutrition care pathway was perceived to be beneficial by key stakeholders. Based on the findings, sustainability and compliance to this model of care may be achieved with improved systems level coordination and communication.

Doctors' knowledge and perceptions of perioperative nutrition support; results from a large Australian tertiary referral Centre Nutritional optimisation in the perioperative period is essential in the prevention and treatment of malnutrition, a state of poor bodily function caused by a lack of nutritional intake, thereby altering body composition. 1 Although identification and treatment of malnutrition is well recognized as a key component of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) guidelines, it is still highly prevalent, and significantly associated with poor outcomes. Studies have shown that up to 50% of patients undergoing abdominal surgery are malnourished. [2][3][4][5] These patients are further at risk due to reduced recognition, combined with poor clinician understanding of treatment strategies due to their lack of knowledge and experience. [6][7][8][9][10] To identify how we can improve on surgical nutrition management within our surgical units, we performed a survey within a large tertiary referral hospital in Melbourne, Australia. The project was approved by the Western Health Office of Research (QA2020.13_61439). A purpose-built, 23-item anonymous online REDCap survey was distributed to all doctors (including interns, residents, registrars, fellows and consultants) working across all general surgical units at Western Health. As our recruitment strategy involved advertising the survey at the weekly surgical morbidity and mortality meeting and via email distribution, response rate calculation was not feasible. The survey, developed by a team of senior academic dietitians and surgeons, included Likert scale 'agree/disagree' questions as well as clinical multiplechoice questions to assess doctor's perceptions and knowledge of perioperative nutritional support within general surgery. Of the 50 respondents, the majority were junior doctors (11 [22%] interns and 17 [34%] residents), 11 were registrars (22%) and a further 11 were consultant surgeons (22%). Only 24% (12) of respondents reported any prior training on perioperative nutritional support. While all respondents agreed on the importance of perioperative nutrition training (100%) and 94% (47) agreed on the need for nutritional assessment both before and after abdominal surgery, only 46% (23) felt confident in being able to initiate enteral or parenteral support according to evidence based guidelines. This was reflected when only approximately half of respondents correctly identified the correct timing to commence enteral (62%; 31) and total parenteral nutrition (50%; 25).Early identification of patients with nutritional deficits is important to ensure appropriate and timely interventions, however only a small proportion (20%; 10) of doctors surveyed were confident in identifying malnutrition and only 34% (17) were able to identify