Feasibility of a targeted nutrition-risk screening tool in Australian mental health services: The NutriMental screener.

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q3 NUTRITION & DIETETICS Nutrition & Dietetics Pub Date : 2025-02-19 DOI:10.1111/1747-0080.70000
Scott B Teasdale, Oliver Ardill-Young, Patricia Crawford, Patrick Gould, Erikka Hennessy, Bronwyn Inall, Sarah King, Rebecca Lancaster, Olivia Millett, Abbey Pearson, Julia Roen, Alyssa Strong, Mark Surdut, Tracy Burrows, Jackie Curtis, Philip B Ward, Annabel Sandra Mueller-Stierlin
{"title":"Feasibility of a targeted nutrition-risk screening tool in Australian mental health services: The NutriMental screener.","authors":"Scott B Teasdale, Oliver Ardill-Young, Patricia Crawford, Patrick Gould, Erikka Hennessy, Bronwyn Inall, Sarah King, Rebecca Lancaster, Olivia Millett, Abbey Pearson, Julia Roen, Alyssa Strong, Mark Surdut, Tracy Burrows, Jackie Curtis, Philip B Ward, Annabel Sandra Mueller-Stierlin","doi":"10.1111/1747-0080.70000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>This study aimed to test the feasibility and acceptability of mental health clinicians using a multifaceted nutrition-risk screening tool in Australian mental health settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A mixed-methods cross-sectional design was used. Mental health clinicians implemented the multifaceted NutriMental screener at seven sites across Australia and provided feedback via a standardised form. Primary outcomes were the feasibility, acceptability and appropriateness domains of the feedback questionnaire. Additional outcomes included association/agreement between the consumer's desire for dietetic support, clinicians' impression of need for dietetic support, and total nutrition risks reported. Directed content analysis was employed to analyse open-ended sections of the clinician feedback questionnaire.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-four clinicians participated, completing the NutriMental screener with a total of 256 mental health consumers. Mean total nutrition risks reported were 6.4 ± 1.8 (out of nine). Mean implementation outcomes (out of five) were 3.1 ± 0.8 for acceptability, 3.7 ± 0.5 for appropriateness, and 4.3 ± 1.7 for feasibility. There was moderate agreement between consumer's desire for dietetic support and clinicians' impression of need for dietetic support κ = 0.32 (95% CI: 0.21-0.43), p < 0.001, and positive correlations between the number of nutrition risks reported and consumer's desire for dietetic support (r = 0.29, p < 0.001) and clinicians' impression of need for dietetic support (r = 0.29, p < 0.001). Six themes and 17 subthemes related to barriers and facilitators to the screener's implementation were identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The multifaceted risk screening tool appears to be feasible, acceptable and appropriate for use within Australian mental health services. Refinements of the NutriMental screener based on clinician feedback may further improve its implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":19368,"journal":{"name":"Nutrition & Dietetics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nutrition & Dietetics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1747-0080.70000","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: This study aimed to test the feasibility and acceptability of mental health clinicians using a multifaceted nutrition-risk screening tool in Australian mental health settings.

Methods: A mixed-methods cross-sectional design was used. Mental health clinicians implemented the multifaceted NutriMental screener at seven sites across Australia and provided feedback via a standardised form. Primary outcomes were the feasibility, acceptability and appropriateness domains of the feedback questionnaire. Additional outcomes included association/agreement between the consumer's desire for dietetic support, clinicians' impression of need for dietetic support, and total nutrition risks reported. Directed content analysis was employed to analyse open-ended sections of the clinician feedback questionnaire.

Results: Fifty-four clinicians participated, completing the NutriMental screener with a total of 256 mental health consumers. Mean total nutrition risks reported were 6.4 ± 1.8 (out of nine). Mean implementation outcomes (out of five) were 3.1 ± 0.8 for acceptability, 3.7 ± 0.5 for appropriateness, and 4.3 ± 1.7 for feasibility. There was moderate agreement between consumer's desire for dietetic support and clinicians' impression of need for dietetic support κ = 0.32 (95% CI: 0.21-0.43), p < 0.001, and positive correlations between the number of nutrition risks reported and consumer's desire for dietetic support (r = 0.29, p < 0.001) and clinicians' impression of need for dietetic support (r = 0.29, p < 0.001). Six themes and 17 subthemes related to barriers and facilitators to the screener's implementation were identified.

Conclusion: The multifaceted risk screening tool appears to be feasible, acceptable and appropriate for use within Australian mental health services. Refinements of the NutriMental screener based on clinician feedback may further improve its implementation.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nutrition & Dietetics
Nutrition & Dietetics 医学-营养学
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
16.10%
发文量
69
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Nutrition & Dietetics is the official journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia. Covering all aspects of food, nutrition and dietetics, the Journal provides a forum for the reporting, discussion and development of scientifically credible knowledge related to human nutrition and dietetics. Widely respected in Australia and around the world, Nutrition & Dietetics publishes original research, methodology analyses, research reviews and much more. The Journal aims to keep health professionals abreast of current knowledge on human nutrition and diet, and accepts contributions from around the world.
期刊最新文献
Feasibility of a targeted nutrition-risk screening tool in Australian mental health services: The NutriMental screener. Translating digital health services for nutrition care management of chronic conditions in outpatient settings: A multi-stakeholder e-Delphi study. Public perceptions of nutrition diagnosis terminology and implications for clinical practice. Investigating the nutritional quality of charitable ready meals for people experiencing food insecurity-An Australian case study. Public health interventions targeted at discretionary food portion control: A qualitative study from consumers' perspectives.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1