English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objective: The purpose of the study is to investigate the effect of two nutritional follow-up intervention methods: home visit and telephone follow-up, on ADL, physical function, quality of life, readmission, and mortality, and compare the interventions with no followup. This article describes the considerations behind the study design. Design: The study is a randomized clinical study. The randomization allocated participants to one of three groups: ‘home visit’, ‘telephone consultation’, or ‘control’. Setting: Participants were recruited from two geriatric wards between May 2011 and October 2013. The follow-up period fell eight weeks after discharge from hospital. Participants: Inclusion: Malnourished or at risk of malnutrition, 75+ years and older, home-dwelling, and living alone. Exclusion: Terminal illness, cognitive impairment, and nursing home resident. Intervention: Nutritional counselling after hospital discharge, based on individual nutritional needs identified during admission, and tailored to the individual’s preferences and situation. The intervention was performed by a clinical dietician, and included the patient’s daily home carer. The intervention took place 1 week, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks after discharge, either as face-to-face counselling in the patients’ homes (home visit group), or via telephone (telephone consultation group). The control group received no followup after discharge. Measurements: Primary outcome is a change in ADL (Barthel-100), while secondary outcomes include other physical measurements (handgrip strength, 30-sec. chair stand test, CAS), quality of life and depression measurements (SF-36, Depression List, Geriatric Depression Score), and Avlund mobility-tiredness score. Other secondary outcome measures are readmission, and mortality rates at 30 and 90 days post-discharge. Conclusion: This randomized clinical trial will evaluate and compare two approaches to nutritional follow-up after discharge from hospital with no follow-up. It is expected that these interventions will prevent deterioration in physical function, which is significant in preventing further deterioration of physical, mental, and social functions, and reduce hospital readmissions and mortality.

NUTRITIONAL FOLLOW-UP AFTER DISCHARGE OF MALNOURISHED GERIATRIC PATIENTS - DESIGN OF A RANDOMIZED CLINICAL STUDY