Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42294533›Full record

Trial reportJournal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association2026

Family-Centred Telehealth-Enhanced Dietary Counselling for the Treatment of Protein-Energy Malnutrition in Rural-Living Older Adults Transitioning From Rehabilitation to Home: A Pilot Controlled Trial.

Skye Marshall, Molly M Fahey, Barbara S van der Meij, Marian A E de van der Schueren, Lucy Leigh, Elizabeth Johnston, Charlene Wright, Robina Rogan, Megan Crichton, Helena Rodi and 3 more

Abstract readControlled Clinical TrialPragmatic Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Skye MarshallCentre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8953-5068
Molly M FaheyThe Centre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2813-4727
Barbara S van der MeijDepartment of Nutrition, Dietetics and Lifestyle, School of Allied Health, HAN University of Applied Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0412-2801
Marian A E de van der SchuerenDepartment of Nutrition, Dietetics and Lifestyle, School of Allied Health, HAN University of Applied Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5693-0811
Lucy LeighHunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5198-8843
Elizabeth JohnstonCancer Council Queensland, Fortitude Valley, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9486-5704
Charlene WrightCentre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2918-6032
Robina RoganConsumer representative, Equitable Cancer Outcomes across Rural and Remote Australia (ECORRA) National Consumer Program, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Megan CrichtonSchool of Nursing, Cancer and Palliative Outcomes Centre, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1273-5368
Helena RodiCentre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2791-7209
Anna ChapmanCentre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7965-4098
Xueying TangCentre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6530-7642
Anna UgaldeCentre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2473-8435

Funding

Bond University
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFamily carers have a key role in supporting malnourished older adults; yet, intervention evidence is lacking in the rehabilitation setting. This study aimed to explore the preliminary effects and acceptability of a family-centred, telehealth-enhanced dietary counselling intervention for treating protein-energy malnutrition (PEM) in rural-living older adults transitioning from rehabilitation to home, compared with usual care, in matched patient-carer dyads.

methodsA pragmatic, historically controlled, prospective, two-arm non-randomised controlled trial was conducted as a pilot study. Fifteen malnourished older adults admitted to rural rehabilitation units in New South Wales, Australia, and their family carers, were recruited and matched to 15 historical controls. The Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) was the primary outcome for nutrition status assessed at rehabilitation admission, discharge, and 3 months post-discharge. Quality of life, physical function, length of stay, discharge location, institutionalisation, mortality, carer burden, and service satisfaction were secondary outcomes. The historical control group received usual care. The intervention group received a telehealth-enhanced dietary counselling intervention developed with co-design principles, which engaged the family carer as a partner in the nutrition care team, delivered during the rehabilitation admission and for 3 months post-discharge.

resultsThe difference in PG-SGA score from baseline to 3 months post-discharge between the two groups was 3.46 (95%CI: -2.07, 9.01; p = 0.238). The intervention group had a higher proportion of patients who were well-nourished at 3 months post-discharge compared to controls (60% vs 13%). At 3 months post-discharge, the intervention group had lower odds of being rated malnourished or with more severe malnutrition (i.e., moderate vs. well-nourished, severe vs. moderate) on the PG-SGA (OR 0.01, 95%CI: 0.00, 0.27; p = 0.005). There was a trend towards the intervention group having reduced odds of being discharged to a location other than home (OR 0.18, 95%CI: 0.03, 1.07; p = 0.06). The intervention was perceived as acceptable to patients and family carers. There were no differences between groups in other outcomes.

conclusionCompared with usual care, the family-centred telehealth-enhanced dietary counselling intervention for the treatment of PEM in rural-living older adults transitioning from rehabilitation to home demonstrated preliminary efficacy and was acceptable to both patients and family carers. Future research aiming to improve PEM should meaningfully engage family carers as partners in the nutrition care team.

Indexed as

CounselingProtein-Energy MalnutritionTelemedicineAgedAged, 80 and overCaregiversFemaleHome Care ServicesHumansMaleNew South WalesNutritional StatusNutrition AssessmentPilot ProjectsProspective StudiesQuality of Lifeagedcaregiversdiet therapyfamily carersprotein‐energy malnutritionrehabilitation hospitalsrural healthrural health servicestelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID42294533
PMCPMC13267165

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.