Background Nutrition and mealtime interventions can improve nutritional intake amongst hospital inpatients; however, patient‐reported experience is rarely considered in their development and evaluation. The present study aimed to measure patient‐reported food and mealtime experience to evaluate and inform continuous quality improvement of hospital nutrition care. Methods A cross‐sectional survey with inpatients in seven acute care and rehabilitation wards was conducted. A 27‐item validated questionnaire measured five domains of patient experience: food choices, organisational barriers, feeling hungry, physical barriers to eating and food quality. Responses were summarised descriptively and compared between settings (acute versus rehabilitation), patient demographics (age, gender) and time in hospital. Results Responses from 143 participants (mean age 67 years, 57% male, 28% rehabilitation, median 6 days into hospitalisation) showed that 10% or fewer respondents reported difficulties with food choices, feeling hungry or food quality. The most common difficulties were opening packets (36%), insufficient menu information provided (29%), being interrupted by staff when eating (28%), being disturbed when eating (27%), being in an uncomfortable position when eating (24%) and difficulty reaching food (21%). There were no significant differences in domain patterns by sex, age group or time in hospital. Organisational barriers were reported less frequently amongst rehabilitation participants compared to acute care (P = 0.01). Conclusions This survey highlights areas of positive patient‐reported experience with nutrition care and suggests that local improvement efforts should focus on physical assistance needs and organisational barriers, especially in acute care wards. The questionnaire may be useful for informing and evaluating systematic nutrition care improvements.

Weight loss and malnutrition occur frequently in patients with head and neck cancer and are associated with reduced survival. This pragmatic study aimed to determine the effect of a novel pre-treatment model of nutrition care on nutrition outcomes for patients with head and neck cancer receiving chemoradiotherapy. Methods: This health service evaluation consisted of an evaluation of the new model of care implementation (Phase 1) and an evaluation of patient outcomes (Phase 2) in pre-and post-implementation cohorts (n = 64 and n = 47, respectively). All Phase 2 patients received a prophylactic gastrostomy. The new model of care consisted of dietary counselling and commencement of proactive supplementary enteral nutrition via a prophylactic gastrostomy, in addition to normal oral intake, prior to treatment commencement. Nutrition outcomes were collected at baseline (pre-treatment) and 3 months post-radiotherapy completion.Results: The new model of care was successfully incorporated into practice with high referral (96.5%) and attendance (91.5%) rates to the counselling session, and high adherence rates to proactive tube feeding (80.9%). Patients in the postimplementation cohort had less weight-loss (1.2%; p = 0.338) and saw less of a decline in nutritional status compared to patients in the pre-implementation cohort (23% vs. 30%, respectively; p = 0.572), deemed clinically important. However, patients still experienced critical weight loss overall (mean 9.9%). Conclusion: Pre-treatment nutrition care was feasible in standard clinical practice and demonstrated clinically relevant outcome improvements for patients. Future high-quality research is warranted to investigate further multidisciplinary strategies to attenuate weight-loss further, inclusive of patient-reported barriers and enablers to nutrition interventions.

Objectives The aim of this study was to describe the prevalence of cognitive impairment in hospital inpatients, the associated need for assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) and carer perceptions of hospital care. Methods A prospective cross-sectional observational study was conducted in a large metropolitan teaching hospital in Brisbane, Australia. Participants were inpatients aged ≥65 years and their carers. Cognitive impairment was measured by clinician auditors using the validated 4 ‘A’s test (4AT), with a score >0 indicating cognitive impairment (1–3, probable dementia; >3, probable delirium). The need for supervision and/or assistance with ADL was recorded from daily nursing documentation. Carers were invited to complete a brief questionnaire. Results In all, 92 of 216 older inpatients (43%) had cognitive impairment, including 52 (24%) with probable delirium. The need for supervision and/or assistance with ADL increased significantly with 4AT score. Fifty-two carers of patients with cognitive impairment reported feeling welcome and that care was safe. They identified opportunities for better information, greater support and more inclusion of carers. Conclusions Cognitive impairment is common in older inpatients and is associated with increased care needs. Workforce planning and health professional training need to acknowledge the needs of patients with cognitive impairment. There are opportunities for greater support and more involvement of carers. What is known about the topic? Cognitive impairment due to delirium and dementia increases with age, and is common in older medical and surgical inpatients. However, cognitive impairment remains under-recognised by healthcare staff. Australian guidelines now recommend routine screening using valid tools, and including carers, when appropriate, when assessing, caring for and communicating with people with cognitive impairment. What does this paper add? This cross-sectional study using the validated 4AT showed 43% of hospital inpatients aged ≥65 years had cognitive impairment. Participants with cognitive impairment had higher care needs and much longer hospitalisations. Carers of people with cognitive impairment reported unmet information needs in hospital and had limited involvement in assessment and care. What are the implications for practitioners? Cognitive impairment is common in older inpatients. Hospitals and healthcare professionals must be prepared and equipped to recognise cognitive impairment, and address the accompanying patient and carer needs.

Aims Fundamentals of care are particularly important for older people in acute inpatient settings, who are at increased risk of serious hospital‐associated complications like delirium and functional decline. These complications occur due to interactions between clinical complexity and the complex processes and context of hospital care and can be reduced by consistent attention to the fundamentals of care. This paper aims to illustrate of how multi‐level nursing leadership of fundamentals of care can be supported to emerge within complex multidisciplinary delivery systems in acute care. Design Discussion paper informed by clinical and organizational experience of a multidisciplinary leadership team and complexity leadership theory. Data sources We provide a series of vignettes as practical illustrations of a successful multidisciplinary improvement program called Eat Walk Engage which supports the delivery of better care for older inpatients, significantly reducing delirium. We argue that taking a broader complexity‐based approach including collaborative multidisciplinary engagement, iterative and integrated interventions and appropriate knowledge translation frameworks can enable emergent leadership by nurses at all levels. Implications for nursing This promising approach to improving care for older patients requires organizational support for facilitation and reflective practice, and for meaningful data to support change. Our discussion challenges nursing leaders to support the time, agency and connections their nursing staff need in order to emerge as local leaders in fundamental care. Conclusion The debate around scope and responsibilities for fundamentals of care in hospital care has important practical implications for conceptualizing leadership and accountability for improvement. Impact Our discussion illustrates how a structured multidisciplinary approach that acknowledges and navigates complexity can empower nurses to lead and improve outcomes of older patients in acute care.

AimStandardised enteral nutrition protocols are recommended in critical care, however their use and safety are not well described in other inpatient populations. This mixed methods study reports on the use and safety of enteral nutrition protocols for non‐critically ill adults.MethodsA scoping review of published literature was conducted. In addition a retrospective audit of practice at an Australian tertiary teaching hospital with an existing hospital‐wide standardised enteral nutrition protocol was performed. Data on use, safety and adequacy of enteral nutrition prescription were collected from medical records for patients receiving enteral nutrition on acute wards (January–March 2020).ResultsScreening of 9298 records yielded six primary research articles. Studies were generally low quality. Published literature suggested that protocols may reduce time to enteral nutrition initiation and goal rate, and improve adequacy of nutrition provision. No adverse outcomes were reported. From the local audit of practice (105 admissions, 98 patients), enteral nutrition commencement was timely (median 0 (IQR 0–1) days from request; goal rate: median 1 (IQR 0–2) days from commencement and adequate (nil underfeeding), without prior dietitian review in 82% of cases. Enteral nutrition was commenced per protocol in 61% of instances. No adverse events, including refeeding syndrome, were observed.ConclusionsMost inpatients requiring enteral nutrition can be safely and adequately managed on enteral nutrition protocols. Evaluation of protocols outside of the critical care setting remains a gap in the literature. Standardised enteral nutrition protocols may improve delivery of nutrition to patients, whilst allowing dietitians to focus on those with specialised nutrition support needs.