The Impact of Registered Dietitian Staffing and Nutrition Practices in High-Risk Cancer Patients Across the Veterans Health Administration

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 09/05/2019 - 15:12

Background: Malnutrition in cancer patients has a significant correlation with disability, dysfunction and death, as well as increased patient care costs, neutropenia, reduced quality of life, fall risk, fractures, nosocomial infections, and longer treatment durations 1-3. Registered dietitian (RD) involvement early on may increase recognition of malnutrition for at-risk patients. Guidelines for nutrition staffing in cancer centers is illdefined in the literature, with few existing recommendations.

Methods: In Phase 1, a survey of RDs across VHA was conducted to determine current referral and staffing practices surrounding nutrition care and services in outpatient oncology clinics. The survey was administered to RDs who devote some or all of their time to oncology nutrition in the outpatient setting and participate on 1 of 2 popular VHA listservs: a nutrition support listserv, and an oncology nutrition listserv.

Phase 2 will be a multi-site, retrospective, chart analysis among 20 VA facilities who treat cancer patients in the outpatient setting. Site investigators, divided into proactive vs. reactive nutrition practices based on Phase 1 survey results, will be instructed to obtain a list of patients diagnosed with high nutrition risk cancers during 2016 and 2017.

Primary outcomes measured will include weight loss, percent maximum weight change over speci ed timeframes, diagnosis of malnutrition, and reported breaks in treatment. Secondary outcomes include overall survival and disease-free survival. For all comparisons, P < 0.05 will be considered statistically signifcant.

Discussion: The data from 46 sites completing the national survey show that RD staffing practices vary widely across VA cancer centers. Few centers staff full time or dedicated oncology RDs independent of patient caseload, with the median oncology dedicated RD FTE being 0.5. Consult and referral practices dictating nutrition intervention were found to be reported as 17% proactive, 25% reactive, and 58% a combination of both practices. Phase 2 results seek to compare patient outcomes with RD staffing and nutrition care practices to determine much needed guidelines for effective nutrition delivery in VHA cancer centers across the U.S.

Author and Disclosure Information

Correspondence: Emily Richters (emily.richters@va.gov)

Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Correspondence: Emily Richters (emily.richters@va.gov)

Author and Disclosure Information

Correspondence: Emily Richters (emily.richters@va.gov)

Background: Malnutrition in cancer patients has a significant correlation with disability, dysfunction and death, as well as increased patient care costs, neutropenia, reduced quality of life, fall risk, fractures, nosocomial infections, and longer treatment durations 1-3. Registered dietitian (RD) involvement early on may increase recognition of malnutrition for at-risk patients. Guidelines for nutrition staffing in cancer centers is illdefined in the literature, with few existing recommendations.

Methods: In Phase 1, a survey of RDs across VHA was conducted to determine current referral and staffing practices surrounding nutrition care and services in outpatient oncology clinics. The survey was administered to RDs who devote some or all of their time to oncology nutrition in the outpatient setting and participate on 1 of 2 popular VHA listservs: a nutrition support listserv, and an oncology nutrition listserv.

Phase 2 will be a multi-site, retrospective, chart analysis among 20 VA facilities who treat cancer patients in the outpatient setting. Site investigators, divided into proactive vs. reactive nutrition practices based on Phase 1 survey results, will be instructed to obtain a list of patients diagnosed with high nutrition risk cancers during 2016 and 2017.

Primary outcomes measured will include weight loss, percent maximum weight change over speci ed timeframes, diagnosis of malnutrition, and reported breaks in treatment. Secondary outcomes include overall survival and disease-free survival. For all comparisons, P < 0.05 will be considered statistically signifcant.

Discussion: The data from 46 sites completing the national survey show that RD staffing practices vary widely across VA cancer centers. Few centers staff full time or dedicated oncology RDs independent of patient caseload, with the median oncology dedicated RD FTE being 0.5. Consult and referral practices dictating nutrition intervention were found to be reported as 17% proactive, 25% reactive, and 58% a combination of both practices. Phase 2 results seek to compare patient outcomes with RD staffing and nutrition care practices to determine much needed guidelines for effective nutrition delivery in VHA cancer centers across the U.S.

Background: Malnutrition in cancer patients has a significant correlation with disability, dysfunction and death, as well as increased patient care costs, neutropenia, reduced quality of life, fall risk, fractures, nosocomial infections, and longer treatment durations 1-3. Registered dietitian (RD) involvement early on may increase recognition of malnutrition for at-risk patients. Guidelines for nutrition staffing in cancer centers is illdefined in the literature, with few existing recommendations.

Methods: In Phase 1, a survey of RDs across VHA was conducted to determine current referral and staffing practices surrounding nutrition care and services in outpatient oncology clinics. The survey was administered to RDs who devote some or all of their time to oncology nutrition in the outpatient setting and participate on 1 of 2 popular VHA listservs: a nutrition support listserv, and an oncology nutrition listserv.

Phase 2 will be a multi-site, retrospective, chart analysis among 20 VA facilities who treat cancer patients in the outpatient setting. Site investigators, divided into proactive vs. reactive nutrition practices based on Phase 1 survey results, will be instructed to obtain a list of patients diagnosed with high nutrition risk cancers during 2016 and 2017.

Primary outcomes measured will include weight loss, percent maximum weight change over speci ed timeframes, diagnosis of malnutrition, and reported breaks in treatment. Secondary outcomes include overall survival and disease-free survival. For all comparisons, P < 0.05 will be considered statistically signifcant.

Discussion: The data from 46 sites completing the national survey show that RD staffing practices vary widely across VA cancer centers. Few centers staff full time or dedicated oncology RDs independent of patient caseload, with the median oncology dedicated RD FTE being 0.5. Consult and referral practices dictating nutrition intervention were found to be reported as 17% proactive, 25% reactive, and 58% a combination of both practices. Phase 2 results seek to compare patient outcomes with RD staffing and nutrition care practices to determine much needed guidelines for effective nutrition delivery in VHA cancer centers across the U.S.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Citation Override
Abstract Presented at the 2019 Association of VA Hematology/Oncology Annual Meeting
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Wed, 09/04/2019 - 15:45
Un-Gate On Date
Wed, 09/04/2019 - 15:45
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Wed, 09/04/2019 - 15:45
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

Evaluation of Vitamin D Supplementation in a Veteran Population

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 12/15/2022 - 15:09
Display Headline
Evaluation of Vitamin D Supplementation in a Veteran Population

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Emily C. Pherson; Karen Black, PharmD, CGB; Melissa Tiedeman; and Amy Chung

Issue
Federal Practitioner - 29(8)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
29
Legacy Keywords
Emily C. Pherson, Karen Black, Melissa Tiedeman; and Amy Chung, vitamin D, supplementsEmily C. Pherson, Karen Black, Melissa Tiedeman; and Amy Chung, vitamin D, supplements
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Emily C. Pherson; Karen Black, PharmD, CGB; Melissa Tiedeman; and Amy Chung

Author and Disclosure Information

Emily C. Pherson; Karen Black, PharmD, CGB; Melissa Tiedeman; and Amy Chung

Article PDF
Article PDF

Issue
Federal Practitioner - 29(8)
Issue
Federal Practitioner - 29(8)
Page Number
29
Page Number
29
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Evaluation of Vitamin D Supplementation in a Veteran Population
Display Headline
Evaluation of Vitamin D Supplementation in a Veteran Population
Legacy Keywords
Emily C. Pherson, Karen Black, Melissa Tiedeman; and Amy Chung, vitamin D, supplementsEmily C. Pherson, Karen Black, Melissa Tiedeman; and Amy Chung, vitamin D, supplements
Legacy Keywords
Emily C. Pherson, Karen Black, Melissa Tiedeman; and Amy Chung, vitamin D, supplementsEmily C. Pherson, Karen Black, Melissa Tiedeman; and Amy Chung, vitamin D, supplements
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media