Background Dietitians working in private practices in primary settings provide nutrition care to support individuals with the prevention and management of chronic disease. A better understanding of the type and usage of data collected by dietitians in this setting may provide insights to optimise the effectiveness and impact of the workforce. The present study explored the perceptions of leading Australian private practice dietitians on the collection and usage of data in their practice. Methods A qualitative descriptive study of Australian private practice dietitians, recruited by snowball sampling, was conducted on their perceptions and attitudes towards collecting and using data. Data were collected by semi‐structured interviews and all interview data were thematically analysed. Results Twenty‐three dietitians participated. Five themes emerged: (i) collecting data is challenging, nuanced, unclearly defined and therefore not routinely carried out; (ii) consistent data collection processes are impeded by the diversity of practise and practices; (iii) business‐related data collection is essential for sustainable dietetic services; (iv) clinical outcomes are fundamental to dietetic services; and (v) standardised, integrated systems are needed to enable routine data collection and synthesis. Conclusions Our findings demonstrate the rudimentary role business acumen has in practice viability and provides evidence to potentially re‐shape the future of dietetic education in Australia. Private practice dietitians may benefit from tools and training that enable consistent collection of data about their services. Such data could enable benchmarking across the workforce and contribute to a broader understanding of dietetic impact on public health.
Aims: Effective quality improvement strategies are essential to enhancing outcomes of dietetic care. Interventions informed by complex adaptive systems theory have demonstrated effectiveness in other healthcare settings. This study aimed to explore primary care dietetics practice using complex adaptive systems theory and to identify factors that individuals across the healthcare system can examine and address to improve the quality of dietetic care. Methods: Qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews of healthcare consumers and professionals involved in the provision of dietetic care. Data collection and analysis was guided by a complexity-informed conceptual framework. The Framework Method was used to code transcripts and identify themes describing primary care dietetics. Results: Twenty-three consumers and 26 primary care professionals participated. Participants described dietetic care as being delivered by individuals organised into formal and informal systems that were influenced by the wider environment, including legal, economic, and socio-cultural systems. Dietitians described interactions with consumers as a learning opportunity and sought education, mentoring, or supervision to address knowledge and skill gaps.Relationships underpinned transfer of information between individuals. Conclusion: Complex adaptive systems theory proved to be a useful conceptual framework for primary care dietetics. Factors identified at the macro (e.g., funding), meso (e.g., professional networks), and micro (e.g., consumer education) levels should be examined and addressed to improve the quality of dietetic care.
Background: Quality improvement strategies have been widely applied in health care; however, little is known about their use in primary care dietetics. This review aims to describe and evaluate the effectiveness of quality improvement strategies that seek to improve patient outcomes by enhancing dietetic care compared to standard dietetic care. Methods: The study employed a systematic review and meta-analysis design following PRISMA guidelines and included studies up to March 2021. Studies were included if they used a randomised controlled trial (RCT) design to evaluate the effect of a quality improvement strategy applied to care delivered by a dietitian on patient outcomes. A meta-analysis was conducted where there were sufficient studies with homogeneous populations and outcome measures. Results: Twelve RCTs (n = 1604) met the inclusion criteria for review and five studies (n = 511) were eligible for meta-analysis for glycated haemoglobin in patients with type 2 diabetes. The most frequently reported quality improvement strategies addressed disease management programs (58%), patient education (67%), group care (42%) and patient self-management (42%). A positive intervention effect was reported in 50% of the included studies. A low grade of evidence supported a positive intervention effect for quality improvement intervention by a dietitian for glycated haemoglobin (pooled mean difference = −0.39% with 95% confidence interval = −0.70 to −0.08, p = 0.01) in n = 511 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Conclusions: Interventions aimed at enhancing quality in primary care dietetic practice support improvements in patient outcomes. Further research on quality improvement interventions for patient outcomes is required to strengthen the evidence base in this important topic. K E Y W O R D S nutrition care, primary care, quality improvement Keypoints • This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesises results from 12 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effectiveness of quality improvement strategies with respect to improving patient outcomes. • Quality improvement interventions most frequently aimed to improve effectiveness, efficiency and person-centredness, whereas no interventions aimed to improve the timeliness or safety of care.
Background Primary healthcare is the ideal setting to address diet-related disease through delivery of nutrition services. However, quality nutrition care has not previously been defined from the healthcare consumer perspective. Objectives To explore, and develop a theoretical model of, healthcare consumer expectations of quality nutrition care in the primary healthcare setting. Methods A qualitative study design collected data describing healthcare consumer expectations of nutrition care. Consumers were recruited through social media and research networks, screened, and invited to participate in a semi-structured telephone interview. Interviews explored experiences and views of nutrition care. Interviews were thematically analysed, and informed development of a model using an iterative process. Results Twenty-three healthcare consumers participated in an interview. Five themes were identified. The Quality in Nutrition Care consumer model developed from these themes comprised 5 interconnected components, these being: (i) quality nutrition care occurs within an integrated societal system; (ii) quality nutrition care is available, accessible, and affordable; (iii) quality nutrition care is up-to-date and evidence based; (iv) quality nutrition care is underpinned by positive relationships; and (v) quality nutrition care is personalized to consumer needs. Conclusions The consumer-derived model of quality nutrition care can be used by providers to inform activities that enhance primary healthcare practice, outcomes, and impact. The model has important implications for primary healthcare system reform and policy. Future research should explore the provision of dietetic services in primary care, with specific focus on factors that influence quality care, and investigate how quality is monitored and improved.
Background: Evidence-based models are effective tools for informing quality improvement activities in health care. The Quality in Nutrition Care (QUINCE) model is an evidence-based model that describes quality nutrition care in the primary care setting but has not been applied to primary care dietetics. The present study comprised two phases. In the first phase, the study aimed to evaluate and compare healthcare consumers and professional perspectives on the importance of the 10 statements to understand their relevance for dietetics care. In the second phase, the study aimed to test and enhance the QUINCE model using healthcare consumer and professional responses to statements that were identified as relevant to primary care dietetics in the first phase. Methods: Quantitative and qualitative data were collected using an online survey comprising statements describing quality dietetic care adapted from the complexity literature. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistical analysis to investigate statement importance as rated by participants using a six-point Likert scale. Qualitative content analysis was performed on the qualitative data using a deductive-inductive approach to identify patterns in the data. The QUINCE model was compared with identified patterns and modified as appropriate. Results: One hundred and fourteen consumers and 107 primary care professionals agreed on the importance of seven statements but expressed divergent views on the remaining three statements that addressed: (1) access to medical records; (2) access to performance and safety information; and (3) variation in care between dietitians. The QUINCE model was modified to produce the Quality in Nutrition Care Model for Dietitians (QUINCE-MOD) describing quality dietetic care in the primary care setting. Conclusions: Consumers and professionals share views on some aspects of quality dietetic care but diverge on other aspects. The QUINCE-MOD is an evidence-based, complexity-informed model that describes components of quality relevant to primary care dietetics. The model should be applied at the practice level to reflect the unique perspective of quality at that level.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.