AimTo gather and understand the experience of hospital mealtimes from the perspectives of those receiving and delivering mealtime care (older inpatients, caregivers and staff) using photovoice methods to identify touchpoints and themes to inform the co‐design of new mealtime interventions.MethodsThis study was undertaken on acute care wards within a single metropolitan hospital in Brisbane, Australia in 2019. Photovoice methods involved a researcher accompanying 21 participants (10 older patients, 5 caregivers, 4 nurses and 2 food service officers) during a mealtime and documenting meaningful elements using photographs and field notes. Photo‐elicitation interviews were then undertaken with participants to gain insight into their experience. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis, involving a multidisciplinary research team including a consumer.ResultsThemes were identified across the three touchpoints: (1) preparing for the meal (the juggle, the anticipation), (2) delivering/receiving the meal (the rush, the clutter and the wait) and (3) experiencing the meal (the ideal, pulled away and acceptance). Despite a shared understanding of the importance of meals and shared vision of ‘the ideal’ mealtime, generally this was a time of tension, missed cares and dissatisfaction for staff, patients and caregivers. There was stark contrast in some aspects of mealtime experience, with simultaneous experiences of ‘the rush’ (staff) and ‘the wait’ (patients and caregivers). There was an overwhelming sense of acceptance and lack of control over change from all.ConclusionsThis study identified themes during hospital mealtimes which have largely gone unaddressed in the design of mealtime interventions to date. This research may provide a framework to inform the future co‐design of mealtime interventions involving patients, caregivers and multidisciplinary staff, centred around these key touchpoints.Practice ImplicationsMealtimes are experienced differently by patients, caregivers, nurses and food service officers across three key touchpoints: preparing for, delivering/receiving and experiencing the meal. Improving mealtime experiences therefore necessitates a collaborative approach, with co‐designed mealtime improvement programs that include specific interventions focusing each touchpoint. Our data suggest that improvements could focus on reducing clutter, clarifying mealtime roles and workflows and supporting caregiver involvement.ImpactWhat problem did the study address?
Mealtimes are the central mechanism to meet patients' nutritional needs in hospital; however, research consistently shows that many patients do not eat enough to meet their nutritional requirements and that they often do not receive the mealtime assistance they require.
Interventions to improve hospital mealtimes have, at best, shown only modest improvements in nutritional intake and mealtime care practices. Gaining deeper insight into the mealtime experience from multiple perspectives may identify new opportunities for improvement.
What were the main findings?
Patients, caregivers and staff have shared ideals of comfort, autonomy and conviviality at mealtimes, but challenges of complex teamwork and re‐prioritisation of mealtimes in the face of prevailing power hierarchies make it difficult to achieve this ideal.
There are three discrete touchpoints (preparing for, delivering/receiving and experiencing the meal) that require different approaches to improvement.
Our data suggests a need to focus improvement on reducing clutter, clarifying mealtime roles and workflows and supporting caregivers.
Where and on whom will the research have an impact?
The research provides a framework for multidisciplinary teams to begin co‐designing improvements to mealtime care to benefit patients, caregivers and staff, while also providing a method for researchers to understand other complex care situations in hospital.
Reporting MethodThis manuscript is written in adherence with the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research.Patient or Public ContributionPatients and caregivers were involved in the conception and design of the study through their membership of the hospital mealtime reference group. A consumer researcher (GP) was involved in the team to advise on study conduct (i.e. recruitment methods and information), data analysis (i.e. coding transcripts), data interpretation (i.e. review and refinement of themes) and manuscript writing (i.e. review and approval of final manuscript).
