Associations between patterns of participation in community activities and social support, self-efficacy, self-rated health among community-dwelling older adults.

Certain types of community-based social activities improve the health issues of older adults; however, the present patterns of participation in community activities remain unknown. This study aims 1) to identify community-dwelling older adults' patterns of participation in community-based activities and 2) to evaluate the relationships between social support, self-efficacy, self-rated health, and the patterns of participation in community activities. This cross-sectional study used data collected from 146 older adults aged ≥65 years who participated in community events in Japan in 2018. Cluster analysis was used to identify subjects' patterns of participation in community activities. In the multinomial logistic regression model, the participation pattern (dependent variable), and social support and self-efficacy (independent variables), were included, adjusting for age, sex, and years of residency. Three participation pattern clusters were identified: diverse activities (58%), municipal events (30%), and senior citizen club (12%). The proportion of participants reported themselves healthy were 93%, 88%, and 78% for diverse activities, municipal events, and senior citizen club clusters, respectively. Compared to those in the senior citizen club cluster, older adults in the diverse activities cluster were more likely to have self-efficacy (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.19, p = .041) and social support (aOR: 2.35, p = .018), while participants in the municipal events cluster were associated with only social support (aOR: 3.29, p = .022). Increasing social support and self-efficacy may promote seniors' participation in diverse community activities, which would be beneficial for their healthy aging. Further studies are needed to evaluate the causal relationships.

Differences in characteristics of raters who use the visual estimation method in hospitals based on their training experiences.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Despite a clinical need, only a few studies have provided information concerning visual estimation training for raters to improve the validity of their evaluations. This study aims to describe the differences in the characteristics of raters who evaluated patients' dietary intake in hospitals using the visual estimation method based on their training experiences. METHODS: We collected data from three hospitals in Tokyo from August to September 2016. The participants were 199 nursing staff members, and they completed a self-administered questionnaire on demographic data; working career; training in the visual estimation method; knowledge, attitude, and practice associated with nutritional care; and self-evaluation of method validity of and skills of visual estimation. We classified participants into two groups, experienced and inexperienced, based on whether they had received training. Square test, Mann-Whitney U test, and univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis were used to describe the differences between these two groups in terms of their characteristics; knowledge, attitude, and practice associated with nutritional care; and self-evaluation of method validity and tips used in the visual estimation method. RESULTS: Of the 158 staff members (79.4%) (118 nurses and 40 nursing assistants) who agreed to participate in the analysis, thirty-three participants (20.9%) were trained in the visual estimation method. Participants who had received training had better knowledge (2.70 ± 0.81, score range was 1-5) than those who had not received any training (2.34 ± 0.74, p = 0.03). Score of self-evaluation of method validity of the visual estimation method was higher in the experienced group (3.78 ± 0.61, score range was 1-5) than the inexperienced group (3.40 ± 0.66, p < 0.01). Mean total scores of using tips in the visual estimation method in the experienced and inexperienced groups were 19.6 ± 1.76 and 17.9 ± 2.28, respectively (score range was 6-24), differing significantly between the two groups (p < 0.01). Multivariable logistic regression revealed that participants who had been trained had adequate knowledge (OR: 2.78, 95% CI: 1.05-7.35) and frequently used tips in visual estimation (OR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.26-2.73). CONCLUSION: Trained participants had more required knowledge and they used visual estimation tips more frequently than participants who had not been trained in the visual estimation method. This study provides new evidence for the importance of training clinical staff members to use the visual estimation method appropriately and makes suggestions to improve the validity of the visual estimation method.

Differences in the validity of a visual estimation method for determining patients' meal intake between various meal types and supplied food items.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The aim of this study was to examine differences in the validity of a visual estimation method for determining patients' meal intake between various meal types and supplied food items in hospitals and to find factors influencing the validity of a visual estimation method. METHODS: There are two procedures by which we obtained the information on dietary intake of the patients in these hospitals. These are both by visual assessment from the meal trays at the time of their clearing, by the attending nursing staff and by weighing conducted by researchers. The following criteria are set for the target trays: A) standard or therapeutic meals, which are monitored by a doctor, for energy and/or protein and/or sodium; B) regular, bite-sized, minced and pureed meal texture, and C) half-portion meals. Visual assessment results were tested for their validity by comparing with the corresponding results of weighing. Differences between these two methods indicated the estimated and absolute values of nutrient intake. RESULTS: A total of 255 (76.1%) trays were included in the analysis out of the 335 possible trays and the results indicated that the energy consumption estimates by visual or weighing procedures are not significantly different (412 ± 173 kcal, p = 0.15). However, the mean protein consumption was significantly different (16.3 ± 6.7 g/tray, p < 0.01) between the two procedures. Compared with standard meals (38 ± 45 kcal, 1.9 ± 2.5 g/tray), raters significantly misestimated the energy and protein intake of half-portion meals (78 ± 65 kcal, 2.8 ± 2.2 g/tray, p = 0.01) but accurately estimated the protein intake of protein controlled meals (0.5 ± 0.6 g/tray, p = 0.03). Trays adding supplied food items were significantly misestimated for energy intake (66 ± 58 kcal/tray) compared to trays with no additions (32 ± 39 kcal/tray, p < 0.01). Moreover, the results of multivariable analysis demonstrated that supplied food items were significantly associated with increased odds of a difference between the two methods (OR: 3.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-13.85). CONCLUSIONS: There were high correlations between the visual estimation method and the weighing method measuring patients' dietary intake for various meal types and textures, except for meals with added supplied food items. Nursing staff need to be attentive to supplied food items.

Association Between Interdialytic Weight Gain, Perception About Dry Weight, and Dietary and Fluid Behaviors Based on Body Mass Index Among Patients on Hemodialysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify dietary and fluid behaviors associated with relative interdialytic weight gain (RIDWG) (divided by the respective dry weight [DW]) by stratifying the patients according to body mass index (BMI). DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional, multicenter investigation. Between July 2016 and March 2017, data were collected from 4 Japanese dialysis centers in 3 cities. The patients (n = 577) were asked to reply to a self-completed questionnaire, including questions on perception about DW and dietary and fluid behaviors. The differences in perception about DW and dietary and fluid behaviors were compared between RIDWG nonadherence (average RIDWG ≥5％ a month) and adherence subgroups. RESULTS: The 360 participants were stratified into thin (<20; 28.6%), normal low (≥20 and <22; 22.5%), normal high (≥22 and <25; 31.7%), and overweight (≥25; 17.2%) groups on the basis of BMI. In the thin and normal low BMI groups, the RIDWG nonadherent patients were more likely to identify their DW as "looking to increase." Although the difference was less prominent between the adherence subgroups in the thin BMI group, the RIDWG nonadherent patients in normal low BMI group seemed to generally take less care to intentionally regulate their behaviors as a representative of sodium-intake/fluid management. Although patients with a larger body size (overweight and normal high BMI groups) were not associated with this perception about DW, they were associated with some demographic characteristics; regarding the normal high BMI group, a higher proportion of RIDWG nonadherent patients worked full-time, and they more frequently reported an irregular eating pattern. CONCLUSION: Dietary and fluid behaviors associated with RIDWG differed according to the BMI group. Assessing more specific types of patient behaviors, focusing on the underlying factors associated with dietary and fluid behaviors, and taking BMI into consideration are required.