ReviewRisk management and healthcare policy2020
Evidence-Based Analysis of Protected Mealtime Policies on Patient Nutrition and Care.
Review in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prevalence of hospital-acquired malnutrition and modifiable determinants of nutritional deterioration during inpatient admissions: A systematic review of the evidence.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Health policy to address disease-related malnutrition: a scoping review.BMJ nutrition, prevention & health · 2024Review
- Impact of a surgical ward breakfast buffet on nutritional intake in postoperative patients: A prospective cohort pilot study.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Malnutrition in hospitalized patients remains a significant problem. Protected Mealtimes is a complex, inter-professional ward-based intervention that was first introduced in the United Kingdom to address this issue. Now implemented internationally, the approach still remains in key policy documents including the National Health Service Essence of Care. This review aims to synthesize the nutrition, satisfaction and quality of life patient/resident outcomes that arise from the implementation of Protected Mealtimes in hospitals and residential aged care facilities and to consider fidelity issues that have been reported in previous research. A defined search strategy was implemented in seven databases to identify full text papers of original research that evaluated Protected Mealtimes implementation. After screening, data were extracted from eight studies (7 quantitative and 1 qualitative study) that were conducted in hospitals. There was no research identified from the aged care sector. There were few positive outcomes that resulted from Protected Mealtimes implementation, many fidelity issues with the intervention were reported. It is apparent that Protected Mealtimes provide few, if any, benefits for hospitalized patients. It is a complex, multi-pronged initiative that has limited fidelity and limited outcomes. As such, we recommend that disinvestment by policy makers for hospitals should be considered, with the implementation of other evidence based mealtime initiatives. We provide no recommendation for disinvestment in the aged care sector, since the approach has not been evaluated against any of the eligible outcomes of this review.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.