BACKGROUND: An early return to normal intake and early mobilization enhances postoperative recovery. However, one out of six surgical patients is undernourished during hospitalization and approximately half of the patients eat 50% or less of the food provided to them. We assessed the use of newly introduced breakfast buffets in two wards for gastrointestinal and oncological surgery and determined the impact on postoperative protein and energy intake.METHODS: A prospective pilot cohort study was conducted to assess the impact of the introduction of breakfast buffets in two surgical wards. Adult patients had the opportunity to choose between an attractive breakfast buffet and regular bedside breakfast service. Primary outcomes were protein and energy intake during breakfast. We asked patients to report the type of breakfast service and breakfast intake in a diary over a seven-day period. Prognostic factors were used during multivariable regression analysis.RESULTS: A total of 77 patients were included. The median percentage of buffet use per patient during the seven-day study period was 50% (IQR 0-83). Mean protein intake was 14.7 g (SD 8.4) and mean energy intake 332.3 kcal (SD 156.9). Predictors for higher protein intake included the use of the breakfast buffet (β = 0.06, p = 0.01) and patient weight (β = 0.13, p = 0.01). Both use of the breakfast buffet (β = 1.00, p = 0.02) and Delirium Observation Scale scores (β = -246.29, p = 0.02) were related to higher energy intake.CONCLUSION: Introduction of a breakfast buffet on a surgical ward was associated with higher protein and energy intake and it could be a promising approach to optimizing such intake in surgical patients. Large, prospective and preferably randomized studies should confirm these findings.
Objectives To identify factors associated with kinesiophobia (fear of movement) after cardiac hospitalisation and to assess the impact of kinesiophobia on cardiac rehabilitation (CR) initiation.Design Prospective cohort study.Setting Academic Medical Centre, Department of Cardiology.Participants We performed a prospective cohort study in cardiac patients recruited at hospital discharge. In total, 149 patients (78.5% male) with a median age of 65 years were included, of which 82 (59%) were referred for CR.Primary and secondary outcome measures We assessed kinesiophobia with the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK). For this study, the total score was used (range 13–52). We assessed baseline factors (demographics, cardiac disease history, questionnaire data on anxiety, biopsychosocial complexity and self-efficacy) associated with kinesiophobia using linear regression with backward elimination. For linear regression, the standardised beta (β) was reported. Prospectively, the impact of kinesiophobia on probability of CR initiation, in the first 3 months after hospital discharge (subsample referred for CR), was assessed with logistic regression. For logistic regression, the OR was reported.Results Moderate and severe levels of kinesiophobia were found in 22.8%. In the total sample, kinesiophobia was associated with cardiac anxiety (β=0.33, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.48), social complexity (β=0.23, 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.39) and higher education (β=−0.18, 95% CI: −0.34 to −0.02). In those referred for CR, kinesiophobia was negatively associated with self-efficacy (β=−0.29, 95% CI: −0.47 to −0.12) and positively with cardiac anxiety (β=0.43, 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.62). Kinesiophobia decreased the probability of CR initiation (ORRange13–52 points=0.92, 95% CI: 0.85 to 0.99).Conclusion In patients hospitalised for cardiovascular disease, kinesiophobia is associated with cardiac anxiety, social complexity, educational level and self-efficacy. Kinesiophobia decreased the likelihood of CR initiation with 8% per point on the TSK.
OBJECTIVE: To examine how a healthy lifestyle is related to life expectancy that is free from major chronic diseases.DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The Nurses' Health Study (1980-2014; n=73 196) and the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study (1986-2014; n=38 366).MAIN EXPOSURES: Five low risk lifestyle factors: never smoking, body mass index 18.5-24.9, moderate to vigorous physical activity (≥30 minutes/day), moderate alcohol intake (women: 5-15 g/day; men 5-30 g/day), and a higher diet quality score (upper 40%).MAIN OUTCOME: Life expectancy free of diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer.RESULTS: The life expectancy free of diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer at age 50 was 23.7 years (95% confidence interval 22.6 to 24.7) for women who adopted no low risk lifestyle factors, in contrast to 34.4 years (33.1 to 35.5) for women who adopted four or five low risk factors. At age 50, the life expectancy free of any of these chronic diseases was 23.5 (22.3 to 24.7) years among men who adopted no low risk lifestyle factors and 31.1 (29.5 to 32.5) years in men who adopted four or five low risk lifestyle factors. For current male smokers who smoked heavily (≥15 cigarettes/day) or obese men and women (body mass index ≥30), their disease-free life expectancies accounted for the lowest proportion (≤75%) of total life expectancy at age 50.CONCLUSION: Adherence to a healthy lifestyle at mid-life is associated with a longer life expectancy free of major chronic diseases.
