No abstract

Background The prevalence of hospital malnutrition ranges between 30 and 55%. As malnutrition increases with hospital stay duration, consequences are both clinical and economic, resulting in increased morbidity and mortality. Purpose To analyse if the current resources allow us to implement a nutritional screening system NRS-2002 (Nutritional Risk Screening-2002) or the authors should adapt this method to our centre. Materials and methods Study carried out in a 300-bed hospital. The authors included all patients>18 years and with expected stay>1 day. The authors calculated the time spent in each interview, how many patients may require nutritional assessment and whether it would be possible to perform screening of all income. Finally, The authors evaluated how to implement the NRS-2002 to detect the maximum number of patients at risk of malnutrition. Results During the study period 505 patients were admitted in our hospital, 45% were excluded (stay≤1 day). Of the 277 included, 20% did not know or could not answer to the nutritional survey (NK/NA). The average age of the NK/NA group was higher than the rest: 84.3 (SD11.4) versus 71.5 (SD15.6) years (F=8.8 p<0.003). The average time spent doing the interview was 10.8 (SD3.3) min. The average hospitalisation stay was 7.5 (SD6.6) days with significant differences (F=7.2 p=0.008) by services: medical (MS) 8.7(SD7.1) and surgical (SS) 6.1 (SD 5.5). 57.9% of patients of MS had nutritional risk compared to 37.3% of patients of SS (χ2=9.4 p=0.002). 92.5% of the patients needed the ‘final-test’; wherein>50% required nutritional assessment. Admissions average by day in our hospital is 38 patients. According to the results of this study, screening should be performed in 17 patients, and eight may require nutritional assessment. Conclusions The authors can not implement this screening method for all admitted patients using the available resources. In order to optimise resources and to detect a largest number of nutritional risk patients, The authors decide to perform the NRS-2002 at 5th day of stay. For those patients that can not answer the NRS-2002, the authors decide to implement the short MNA-2009 (Mini Nutritional Assessment-2009).

Background Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are common and unpleasant effects of cancer treatment. Purpose To determine the impact of CINV on patients’ quality of life after highly emetogenic chemotherapy treatment. Materials and methods Prospective and observational study including all administrations of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (doxorubicin or epirubicin in combination with cyclophosphamide, and cisplatin ≥ 50 mg/m2) to adult patients over eight months. After every cycle, all the patients completed the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE), a validated questionnaire used to evaluate the impact of CINV on patients’ daily life on days 3–5 after chemotherapy treatment. A higher score (>108) corresponds to less effect of CINV on daily life. Results We studied 36 administrations corresponding to 20 patients (69.4% female, mean age 66.9 years old (SD 10.4)). Most frequent diagnoses were breast cancer (44.4%), lung cancer (16.7%) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (16.7%). Nausea was reported by 50% of the patients and emesis by 33.3%. In 47.2% of the patients the impact of CINV on patients’ quality of life was observed. In the majority of patients, the nausea score was lower than the vomiting score (47.1 and 52.9 respectively, t = 2.38, p = 0,023). The average FLIE score was 100 (SD 27.8). Conclusions In about half of the patients, the CINV affected their quality of life. Nausea had a higher negative effect on patients’ quality of life than emesis. There is a need to improve antiemetic treatment to improve our patients’ quality of life. Abstract DI-074 Table 1 Antiemetic treatment Average FLIE score Standard deviation serotonin receptor antagonists day 1 + corticosteroids days 1–5 109.9 20.96 serotonin receptor antagonists + corticosteroids + aprepitant days 1–3 75 – serotonin receptor antagonists days 1–5 + corticosteroids day 1 95 51.23 serotonin receptor antagonists + corticosteroids days 1–5 98 27.79 F = 0.711, p = 0.552 Chemotherapeutic drugs Cisplatin 100.4 27.25 Doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide 96.7 32.09 Epirubicin + cyclophosphamide 101.9 26.99 Cisplatin + doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide 107 27.79 F = 0.110 p = 0.953 No conflict of interest.

No abstract

No abstract