O036 - DIETITIANS’ USE OF BEHAVIOUR CHANGE TECHNIQUES TO SUPPORT ADHERENCE TO ORAL NUTRITIONAL SUPPLEMENTS AMONG PATIENTS WITH CANCER: A CONTENT ANALYSIS OF DIETITIAN–PATIENT CONVERSATIONS

O036

DIETITIANS’ USE OF BEHAVIOUR CHANGE TECHNIQUES TO SUPPORT ADHERENCE TO ORAL NUTRITIONAL SUPPLEMENTS AMONG PATIENTS WITH CANCER: A CONTENT ANALYSIS OF DIETITIAN–PATIENT CONVERSATIONS

S. Kiderud¹, E. Lindell², K. Jontell^1,*, E. Lövestam¹, H. Igelström^3,4, C. Sköld⁵, E. Liljeberg^1,4

¹Department of Food Studies, Nutrition and Dietetics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, ²Department of Medicine, Västmanland Hospital, Västerås, ³Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Physiotherapy and behavioural medicine, Uppsala University, ⁴Geriatrics, Rehabilitation Medicine and Pain Centre, Uppsala University Hospital, ⁵Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Cancer Precision Medicine, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

Rationale: Oral nutritional supplements (ONS) are commonly recommended to address malnutrition in patients with cancer, yet adherence is often suboptimal. Evidence on how dietitians support adherence through specific nutrition counselling strategies is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to examine which behaviour change techniques (BCTs) are used in dietitian–patient conversations.

Methods: A combination of qualitative and quantitative content analysis was conducted on 23 audio recorded consultations involving 9 dietitians and 22 patients with cancer and malnutrition or risk of malnutrition. Conversation’s length ranged from 7 to 38 minutes. Identified techniques were coded according to the Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy v1¹.

Results: Seventeen of the 93 BCTs included in the taxonomy were identified in the conversations and used 88 times in total. Use of techniques was highly concentrated around a small subset, primarily adding objects to the environment (providing samples or home delivery of ONS), instructions on how to use them, and collaborative problem-solving and action planning. Other techniques, such as self-monitoring and framing/reframing, were rarely used, whereas techniques like distraction, behavioural practice, and habit formation were not used at all.

Conclusion: Dietitians used several BCTs in nutrition counselling within cancer care, however, their behavioural support relied on a limited subset of the available techniques, suggesting a pragmatic and feasible approach rather than a systematic application of the broader BCT repertoire. Further research is warranted to explore how dietitians’ use of BCTs can be expanded and strengthened to enhance patient-relevant clinical outcomes and improve quality of life.

References: ¹Michie S, et al. Ann Behav Med. 2013;46(1):81–95.

Disclosure of Interest: None declared