Specific Quality of Life Assessment by the NutriQoL® Questionnaire Among Patients Receiving Home Enteral Nutrition

Zamanillo-Campos, Rocío; Ferrer, María Teresa Colomar; López, Rosa María Ruiz; Cortés, María Pilar Sanchís; Planella, Joan Ramón Urgelés

doi:10.1002/jpen.1852

Cited by 7 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(39 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The QoL scores evaluated by SF‐36 lead to a physical component summary score and mental component summary 51,52 . The SF‐12, derived from the longer SF‐36, 53 was also employed by three studies 54–56 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The NutriQoL was released to assess the QoL of patients with HEN irrespective of their underlying diseases and routes of administration. It was shown to be reliable and valid, and it seemed to be useful to assess QoL in Spanish‐speaking population 56,91–94 . Quality of Life—Enteral Feeding Questionnaire (QoL‐EF) was specifically designed to assess the QoL of head and neck cancer patients with enteral feeding tubes 67 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the contents of the tool need to be considered properly when selecting an appropriate tool. Campos et al assessed QoL among patients receiving HEN by both SF‐12 and NutriQoL, and the multivariate analysis showed that HEN type and HEN complications were correlated with NutriQoL scores, whereas SF‐12 scores did not show any associations with nutrition factors 56 . This is not surprising because generic instruments can be employed to evaluate the influence of any disease on a given population and compare QoL in different groups 6–26,54–56,59,60,62 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Campos et al assessed QoL among patients receiving HEN by both SF‐12 and NutriQoL, and the multivariate analysis showed that HEN type and HEN complications were correlated with NutriQoL scores, whereas SF‐12 scores did not show any associations with nutrition factors 56 . This is not surprising because generic instruments can be employed to evaluate the influence of any disease on a given population and compare QoL in different groups 6–26,54–56,59,60,62 . However, they lack the sensitivity to reflect the impact of the specifics of any disease or therapy 6,9,14,17,24,54,56,91 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is not surprising because generic instruments can be employed to evaluate the influence of any disease on a given population and compare QoL in different groups 6–26,54–56,59,60,62 . However, they lack the sensitivity to reflect the impact of the specifics of any disease or therapy 6,9,14,17,24,54,56,91 . Specific questionnaires are usually developed from individuals’ symptoms, problems, and therapies and appear to be more clinically relevant 4,48 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Quality of life assessment instruments in adult patients receiving home parenteral and enteral nutrition: A scoping review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quality of life (QoL) assessment is important to evaluate the effect of the intervention for patients treated with home parenteral and enteral nutrition (HPEN). The purpose of this scoping review is to describe, evaluate, and recommend QoL instruments used in adult patients receiving HPEN. We used the Arksey and O'Malley framework and performed literature searches in five databases (PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) to identify possibly relevant articles that focused on QoL of adult patients receiving HPEN. Of the studies that qualify for full-text screening, two independent researchers extracted data. Twenty-seven QoL instruments were identified, consisting of seven generic instruments, 12 disease-specific instruments, and eight therapy-specific instruments. The Short Form-36 was the most widely used generic instrument and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 was the most commonly employed disease-specific instrument. The recently developed therapy-specific tools, NutriQoL and HPN-QoL, were increasingly employed in studies either alone or in combination with other types of instruments. Important aspects of each instrument were summarized to aid clinicians and researchers in selecting an appropriate instrument when measuring the QoL of adult HPEN patients. Findings could also help to identify the necessity to develop new tools or to modify pre-existing ones to measure QoL of HPEN patients.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Quality of life assessment instruments in adult patients receiving home parenteral and enteral nutrition: A scoping review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Effectiveness of dietary counseling with or without nutrition supplementation in hospitalized patients who are malnourished or at risk of malnutrition: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Wong

Huang

Sowa

et al. 2022

J Parenter Enteral Nutr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Nutrition support is associated with improved survival and nonelective hospital readmission rates among malnourished medical inpatients; however, limited evidence supporting dietary counseling is available. We intend to determine the effect of dietary counseling with or without oral nutrition supplementation (ONS), compared with standard care, on hospitalized adults who are malnourished or at risk of malnutrition. Methods We searched MEDLINE/PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, The Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for studies listed from January 1, 2011, to August 31, 2021. Meta‐analysis was performed to obtain pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs to estimate the effect. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to assess the certainty of the evidence. Results Sixteen studies were identified. Compared with standard care, dietary counseling with or without ONS probably does not reduce inpatient rates of 30‐day mortality (RR = 1.24; 0.60–2.55; I2 = 45%; P = 0.56; moderate certainty), slightly reduces 6‐month mortality (RR = 0.83; 0.69–1.00; I2 = 16%; P = 0.06; high certainty), reduces complications (RR = 0.85; 0.73–0.98; I2 = 0%; P = 0.03; high certainty), and may slightly reduce readmission (RR = 0.83; 0.66–1.03; I2 = 55%; P = 0.10; low certainty) but may not reduce length of stay (mean difference: −0.75 days; −1.66‐0.17; I2 = 70%; P = 0.11; low certainty). Intervention may result in slight improvements in nutrition status/intake and weight/body mass index (low certainty). Conclusions There is an increase in the certainty of evidence regarding the positive impact of dietary counseling on outcomes. Future studies should standardize and provide details/frequencies of counseling methods and ONS adherence to determine dietary counseling effectiveness.

show abstract

Checklist to assess food safety when handling home enteral nutrition

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIdentifying food safety risks when handling enteral formulations at home is important to restore and maintain the health of patients. Therefore, this study developed and validated a food safety assessment checklist for handling home enteral nutrition (HEN).MethodsThis methodological study developed a checklist based on a literature review and interviews with food safety professionals. The content validation, which was conducted by food safety and enteral feeding experts, assessed the relevance, clarity, and simplicity of the checklist using the content validity index of items (CVI‐I), categories (CVI‐C), and the entire instrument (CVI‐EI). Each item was rated as either essential, necessary, or recommended according to the risk in relation to foodborne diseases.ResultsThe Food Safety for Handling Home Enteral Nutrition checklist (FSHEN checklist) that was developed includes 40 items and the following eight categories: physical structure; cleaning of facilities, equipment, furniture, and utensils; pests and waste; water supply; food handlers; ingredients and packaging; handling of enteral formulations; and the bottling and storage of enteral formulations. The CVI‐EI was above the recommendation (≥0.93) for the three assessed criteria, as was the CVI‐C in terms of clarity (≥0.95), relevance (≥0.98), and simplicity (≥0.84). A total of 52.5% of the items were rated as essential, 32.5% as necessary, and 15% as recommended.ConclusionThe FSHEN checklist is relevant, clear, and easy to use. It can help health professionals and individuals working in the field to assess and prioritize items to improve food safety in the management of HEN.

show abstract

Specific Quality of Life Assessment by the NutriQoL® Questionnaire Among Patients Receiving Home Enteral Nutrition

Cited by 7 publications

References 18 publications

Quality of life assessment instruments in adult patients receiving home parenteral and enteral nutrition: A scoping review

Quality of life assessment instruments in adult patients receiving home parenteral and enteral nutrition: A scoping review

Effectiveness of dietary counseling with or without nutrition supplementation in hospitalized patients who are malnourished or at risk of malnutrition: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Checklist to assess food safety when handling home enteral nutrition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About