The Assessment Of Energy And Protein Needs Coverage In Hospitalized Patients

The design of this small pilot study was observational. It was a health examination survey in which quantitative, practical and inexpensive methods that can be easily incorporated into dietetic, medical and nursing practice were used. The study was conducted from 26. 5. 2014 to 20. 6. 2014.

In the study, patients from three different clinical wards of one of the major hospitals in Slovenia were enrolled. Two of them were internal medicine wards, while the third ward was a surgical one. 53 patients were included in the study: 15 men and 4 women from clinical ward 1, 15 men and 17 women from internal medicine wards 2, 16 men and 12 women from surgical wards 3.

The criteria for enrolment were, namely: (1) the ability of the patient to understand the course of the study and be able to sign the informed consent form by hand;(2) at least 5 days of expected stay on the ward; (3) terminal patients were excluded; (4) only patients that were eating exclusively per os were included (patients receiving enteral or parenteral nutrition were excluded).

All included patients received unaltered food prepared in the central kitchen. The appropriate menu was selected by a physician or registered nurse at admission. Some patients received oral nutritional supplements and supplemental food prescribed by nurses and/or dietetics.

All the enrolled patients handedly signed the informed consent form. The study was approved by The Republic of Slovenia National Medical Ethics Committee and was conducted in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki and Oviedo convention.

In the study 53 patients were included. 15 patients (28.3%) were coming from internal medicine ward 1, 23 patients (43.4%) from internal medicine ward 2, and 15 patients (28.3%) from surgical ward 3. Among them there were 22 women (41.5%) and 31 men (58.5%). The mean age was 69.7±11.4 years (internal medicine ward 1: 66.7±16.4; internal medicine ward 2: 71.3±9.2; surgical ward: 73.3±9.0). The mean value of BMI was 27.5±6.3 (internal medicine ward 1: 26.1±5.3; internal medicine ward 2: 29.9±6.9; surgical ward: 25.2±4.9). 31/53 (58.5%) of patients had NRS 2002 scores ≥3 (internal medicine ward 1: 11/15, 73.3%; internal medicine ward 2: 6/23, 26.1%; surgical ward: 14/15, 93.3%).

On average, estimated daily energy needs were assessed to 2064±467kcal (internal medicine ward 1: 2179±472 kcal; internal medicine ward 2: 1849±349 kcal, and surgical ward: 2278±506 kcal), and estimated daily protein needs were assessed to 86.4±24.3 g (internal medicine ward 1: 88.6±17.4 g; internal medicine ward 2: 68.6±13.2 g, and surgical ward: 111.4±20.6 g).

On average, 3.8% of patients ate less than 25% of offered food, 18.9% ate 25-50% of offered food, 45.3% ate 50-75% of offered food and 32.1% ate 75-100% of offered food.

It was possible to establish PEC in all 53 patients enrolled in the study.

On average patients did not cover their relative energy needs: the average value of PEC was 67.4±24.5% (min: 17.2%; max: 127.3%) (internal medicine ward 1: 67.5±25.4%; internal medicine ward 2: 76.0±24.8%; surgical ward: 53.9±17.7%).

The results of univariate analysis of association between PEC and ENVM showed that, in this model, ENVM did not show statistically significant association with PEC, and only 2.8% of variability of PEC could be explained by the fact that the model consisted solely of ENVM (Table 1). All other results are presented in Table 1.

All data necessary to perform multiple logistic regression analysis of association between PEC and ENVM were present in all 53 patients enrolled in the study as well. The results are presented in Table 2. The model was highly statistically significant (pmodel< 0.001), and in total 37.4% of variability of PEC could be explained by this model. In comparison to the results of univariate analysis ENVM in multivariate model showed increased strength of association with PEC that was statistically highly significant (Table 1), and also the percentage of variability of PEC that could be explained by ENVM increased to 15.4%. The strength of association increased also between PEC and all considered potential confounding factors, except sex (Table 2).

It was possible to establish PPC in all 53 patients enrolled in the study.

On average, patients did not cover their relative protein needs: the average value of PPC was 84.0±40.2% (min: 17.8%; max: 165.5%) (internal medicine ward 1: 74.3±36.2%, internal medicine ward 2: 109.2±37.2%; surgical ward: 54.9±21.7%).

The results of univariate analysis of the association between PPC and PNVM showed that in this model PNVM has already shown statistically significant association with PEC (9.5% of variability of PPC could be explained by the fact that the model consisted solely of PNVM) (Table 3). All other results are presented in Table 3.

All data necessary to perform multiple logistic regression analysis of the association between PPC and PNVM were present in all 53 patients enrolled in the study as well. The results are presented in Table 4. The model was highly statistically significant (pmodel = <0.001), and in total 47.7% of variability of PPC could be explained by this model. In comparison to the results of univariate analysis PNVM in multivariate model showed increased strength of association with PEC (Table 2), and also the percentage of variability of PPC that could be explained by PNVM increased to 36.0%.

The main findings of the study showed: a) that, on average, energy needs coverage was not sufficient, and that it could be significantly increased by increasing ENVM, and b) that, on average, protein needs coverage was not sufficient either, although the situation was better than in energy coverage, and that it could be, like in energy needs coverage, significantly increased by increasing PNVM. The main hypothesis – that energy and protein intake in hospitalized patients on average falls below their estimated needs – was confirmed.

Somewhat overlooked contributing factor in the development of hospital malnutrition is that not only food intake but also the amount of the provided food is insufficient. We found a direct association between the provided quantity of energy and protein and the actual intake. Simply and unsurprisingly, if more food is provided, more can possibly be eaten. We observed that too often the provided food was insufficient. 1800-2000 kcal menus were often prescribed universally to both men and women of different heights and weights. A rather high percentage of patients would not cover 100% of the estimated energy needs even if the meals would be fully consumed. This is especially evident in men with higher weight and in patients with conditions characterized by increased metabolism. We also noted patients receiving restrictive menus that are intended for a short time use and have only about 1200 kcal and 40 g of protein. Other researchers also reported that the amount and quality of hospital and nursing home meals often fell below the needs of patients (25, 26). Hankey and Wynne (27) performed a study in an elderly care hospital on 72 elderly patients (>65 years). Mean energy provision (not intake) was only 1472±320 kcal, also the recommendations for fibre and several micronutrients were not met. In another study (28), Wright with colleagues (25) analyzed the energy and nutrient content of hospital diets (regular, soft, low sodium, 1500 kcal, 60 g protein, full liquid and clear liquid) most commonly prescribed to elderly patients in two American hospitals. It would seem that malnutrition is too often treated without regard to what actually caused or contributed to its development. We reached the point where nutrition risk screening is mandatory in all acute care hospitals accredited by Joint Commission (29), but the provision of basic meals that would cover 100% of patient’s individual energy, protein and other nutrient needs is not.

The menus with modified texture and restrictive diets are especially prone to being insufficient (25). We also noticed that hospital menus may be “too healthy”; the hospital food has low energy density. Especially for the elderly, small energy and protein dense meals would be more beneficial (30-33). Broths, soups, stewed fruit and similar foods with negligible energy and protein content are abundant in hospital menus and can be problematic. Especially soups have, for their energy content, a disproportionate satiating effect, so the food intake from the successive dishes is greatly reduced (34, 35). A limiting factor in spontaneous food intake is not the energy value, but the volume of the food (33); the amount of ingested food stays the same despite the increased energy density (34, 35). Enrichment of hospital food with a goal to provide increased energy density was proven to be an effective method in increasing energy intake of hospitalized patients (30-33). Hospital food can be easily and cheaply enriched with cream, cheese, ricotta, milk powder, protein powders, maltodextrins, canola oil and butter.

Nutritional risk (1, 4) and low food intake is still widespread in hospital environments worldwide (Table 6). Food intake in hospitals should be monitored with the same diligence as blood pressure and temperature. Food intake monitoring is simple and does not require special equipment or in depth knowledge (13).

Energy intake (what patients actually ingested) of hospitalized patients in EU is, on average, below 1500 kcal, with protein intake around 60 g (9-11). In one similar Slovenian study (8), the average intake was 1364±326 kcal/d and 61.83±13.78 g of protein.

The study has some limitations. Firstly, the main limitation of this study is that it was performed on only 53 patients. Secondly, the patients included in the study received normal hospital food, therefore the food was subjected to slight variations in portioning. Finally, it was performed in only one hospital. Here, we also have to stress that, in any case, the results and, consequently, also the study should not be considered representative of the entire hospital.

On the other side, this pilot study has also important strengths. The major one is that it pointed out the possibility of insufficient energy and protein coverage in hospitalized patients. This is an emerging problem in ageing populations and it should be taken into consideration. Another strength is the simple method used for rough but quick assessment of food intake, which is feasible to perform anywhere.

As in previous studies we can conclude that hospital malnutrition is still widely present in EU and is still being under-detected (1, 4). The actual food intake is rarely monitored, even when malnutrition is detected (3, 13, 14). From the perspective of public health, early detection of malnutrition and effective nutritional intervention with sufficient energy and protein intakes means better clinical outcomes, shorter hospital stay and lower costs of treatment (13).

This study should be succeeded by a larger study conducted in several hospitals that would determine the prevalence of malnutrition and nutritional risk in Slovenian hospitals. Moreover, the effect of hospital food fortification on the actual food intake should be examined.