Nutrition care benefits of a bedside spoken meal ordering system compared to a paper menu
Malnutrition in hospitals has been well documented in Australia and internationally. Bedside meal ordering systems (BMOS) have the potential to improve patient nutritional care and have been endorsed in Australia and the United States, but there are few published evaluation studies. This study aims to evaluate the effect of a BMOS compared to a paper menu. Outcome measures include: nutritional intake (energy and protein), patient satisfaction, Nutrition Assistant face-to-face time with patients and cost. Baseline data for the paper menu system was collected from 54 consenting patients (58% rate) across five wards at a 210 bed tertiary hospital in Sydney, during September 2011. 69% of patients consumed >50% of their meals over a 24 hour period, with 59% consuming all of breakfast, compared to 44% and 34% consuming all of lunch and dinner respectively. 59% rated overall food satisfaction as ‘very good’; however there was a lack of awareness of the Nutrition Assistants and their roles in menu assistance and dietary guidance. High scores for meal taste, menu variety, expectations and overall satisfaction were associated with a ≥50% intake. The only patient variable linked to an increased satisfaction was age ≥70 years. Observations of Nutrition Assistants identified <1 minute was spent with 88% of patients. A BMOS implementation is planned for February 2012, and post-implementation data will be compared with baseline. Our hypothesis is that having a Nutrition Assistant using a BMOS could increase patient satisfaction and address the deficits in patient knowledge to consequently improve patient dietary intakes
Please refer to publisher version or contact your library.