PD062 - UTILIZATION OF NUTRITION OUTCOME INDICATORS IN EUROPEAN DIETETIC PRACTICE; RESULTS FROM THE INIS 2.0 STUDY

PD062

UTILIZATION OF NUTRITION OUTCOME INDICATORS IN EUROPEAN DIETETIC PRACTICE; RESULTS FROM THE INIS 2.0 STUDY

G. O. Iheme^1,2,*, E. Liljeberg^1,3,4, Y. Orrevall^1,5, E. Lövestam¹

¹Department of Food Studies, Nutrition and Dietetics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden, ²Department of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike, Nigeria, ³Department of Women's and Children's Health, ⁴Geriatrics, Rehabilitation Medicine and Pain Centre, Uppsala University, Uppsala, ⁵Clinical Nutrition, Women's Health and Allied Health Professionals Theme, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden

Rationale: Assessment of nutrition outcomes is key to determining the effectiveness of nutrition interventions in clinical practice. However, there is limited knowledge on how such outcomes are documented and used in routine care. This study aims to describe the type and extent of nutrition outcome indicators used for evaluating nutrition care in routine European clinical settings.

Methods: This study is based on data from a subset of the international INIS 2.0 survey, including dietitians working in clinical settings in nine European countries: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland. The frequency of documenting different types of nutrition outcome data in EHRs was assessed using a 3-point scale (1 = only assessment, 2 = occasional use, 3 = regular use). An unweighted composite index was calculated and compared across work processes and countries (p < 0.05).

Results: A total of 608 (79.6%) out of 764 respondents reported documenting nutrition outcomes within EHR systems, with a lesser proportion (n = 513) using  standardized outcome indicators.  The overall composite utilization index was average (2.18 ± 0.60), but demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.82). Intake and anthropometry-related outcomes were the most frequently reported across respondents. Similarly, indicators related to personal factors, activities and body function also showed relatively high uptake, while the use of other outcome domains varied. The mean composite utilization index varied significantly across countries (H = 101.3, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Nutrition outcome documentation by dietitians is commonly performed in European clinical practice, but remains focused on selected domains. The observed variations across outcome types and countries suggest a need for more consistent and comprehensive approaches to evaluating the impact of nutrition interventions.

Disclosure of Interest: None declared