背景:饮食教育和改良干预措施是改善胃癌患者胃切除术后营养状况和控制症状的有价值和可行的策略。与优先考虑缩短住院时间和加强术后自我管理的行政政策相一致,在胃切除术后提供简化的营养管理方法有望防止体重减轻,并扩大监测这些患者营养和症状方面的资源.
目的:本研究评估了综合方法的有效性,该方法涉及对话的五个顺序步骤,评估,营养计划,并发症,评价,以及改变摄入和管理症状(AIMS)的再保证或消除(CANCER),特别注重加强营养状况和症状管理。
方法:单盲,双臂,随机对照试验。
方法:本研究在山东省某三级医院进行,中国。
方法:胃癌全胃切除术或胃大部切除术患者。
方法:将参与者以1:1的比例随机分配到干预组或对照组。干预组接受了为期16周的CANCER-AIMS干预计划。对照组给予常规饮食指导常规护理。使用每位患者的问卷调查和电子病历来评估饮食摄入量,饮食症状,以及主观和客观的营养状况。在四个特定时间点评估结果:出院前一天和4,8-,出院后16周。
结果:38名参与者完成了研究。研究结果表明,群体和饮食摄入时间之间存在显著的交互作用,饮食症状,干预组和对照组的营养状况(P<0.001)。干预组的膳食摄入量明显高于对照组,减少饮食症状,干预后营养状况优于对照组(P<0.001)。此外,饮食摄入量有显著差异,饮食症状,干预组和对照组根据时间的营养状况。
结论:对胃切除术后胃癌患者的CANCER-AIMS干预可能在增加营养摄入方面有效,减少负面饮食症状,从而改善他们的主观和客观营养状况。
BACKGROUND: Dietary education and modification interventions are valuable and feasible strategies for enhancing nutritional status and managing symptoms in patients with gastric cancer following gastrectomy. In alignment with administrative policies prioritizing shorter hospital stays and enhanced postoperative self-management, the provision of a simplified nutritional management approach following gastrectomy holds promise for preventing weight loss and expanding resources for monitoring both the nutritional and symptomatic aspects of these patients.
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effectiveness of an integrative approach involving the five sequential steps of Conversation, Assessment, Nutrition plan, Complications, Evaluation, and Reassurance or Removal (CANCER) into Altering Intake and Managing Symptoms (AIMS), with specific focus on enhancing nutritional status and symptom management.
METHODS: A single-blind, two-arm, randomized controlled trial.
METHODS: This study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Shandong province,
China.
METHODS: Patients with total or subtotal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
METHODS: The participants were randomly assigned to either the intervention or control group in a 1:1 ratio. The intervention group received a 16-week CANCER-AIMS intervention program. The control group received usual routine care dietary guidance. Questionnaires and electronic medical records of each patient were used to assess dietary intake, dietary symptoms, and subjective and objective nutritional status. Outcomes were assessed at four specific time points: the day before discharge and at 4-, 8-, and 16-weeks following hospital discharge.
RESULTS: Thirty-eight participants completed the study. The findings revealed significant interaction effects between group and time for dietary intake, dietary symptoms, and nutritional status between intervention and control groups (P < 0.001). The intervention group had significantly higher dietary intake, fewer dietary symptoms, and better nutritional status post-intervention than the control group (P < 0.001). Moreover, there were significant differences in dietary intake, dietary symptoms, and nutritional status according to time in both the intervention and control groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The CANCER-AIMS intervention for patients with gastric cancer following gastrectomy may be efficient at enhancing nutritional intake, reducing negative dietary symptoms, and thus improving both their subjective and objective nutritional status.