CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 44Dietetics, Nutrition, and EducationNursing Diagnosis and DocumentationHealth Sciences Research and Education

Use of the nutrition care process and nutrition care process terminology in an international cohort reported by an online survey tool

Open access
Lövestam, Elin, Steiber, Alison, Vivanti, Angela, Boström, Anne-Marie, Devine, Amanda, Haughey, Orla, Kiss, Caroline M., Lang, Nanna R. +13 more·2019·Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
DOI 10.1016/j.jand.2018.09.002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background Dietitians in countries across the world have been implementing the Nutrition Care Process (NCP) and Terminology (NCPT) during the past decade. The implementation process has been evaluated in specific countries and in smaller international studies; however, no large international study comparing implementation between countries has been completed. Objective The aim of this study was to describe and compare the level of NCP/NCPT implementation across 10 countries. Methods A previously tested web-based survey was completed in 2017 by 6,719 dietitians across 10 countries. Participants were recruited through e-mail lists, e-newsletters, and social media groups for dietitians. Nondietitians were excluded through screening questions and targeted dissemination channels. Main outcome measures and statistical analysis The main outcome of interest was the level of implementation of each of the four NCP steps. Differences in implementation between the NCP (process) and NCPT (terminology) were also measured. Differences between groups were assessed using Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U test. Multiple linear regression was used to assess relationships between the main outcomes and respondent demographic information. Results Australia, New Zealand, and the United States had higher implementation rates compared with other countries surveyed. Awareness of the NCP was high in most countries (>90%) but lower in Greece (50%). All countries had a higher implementation level of the NCP (process) compared with the NCPT (terminology). Dietitians working with inpatients reported the highest implementation levels while those working in public health reported the lowest. Conclusions Dietitians in countries with more experience in NCP/NCPT implementation and a clear implementation strategy had higher levels of implementation. To achieve a successful NCP/NCPT implementation among dietitians, there is a need to promote the value of a standardized dietetic language together with the more easily implemented process. There is also a need to promote NCP/NCPT for all areas of practice, and develop strategic plans for implementation of the NCP and NCPT.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jand.2018.09.002

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lövestam, E., Steiber, A., Vivanti, A., Boström, A.-M., Devine, A., Haughey, O., Kiss, C. M., Lang, N. R., Lieffers, J., Lloyd, L., O'Sullivan, T. A., Papoutsakis, C., Peersen, C., Thoresen, L., Orrevall, Y., Corish, C., Eisenbraun, C., Hanning, R., Kristiansen, I., Lorentzen, S. S., & MacLean, A. K.
Affiliations
  • Uppsala University (SE)
  • Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (US)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • Karolinska University Hospital (SE)
  • Edith Cowan University (AU)
  • Royal Victoria Eye and Ear Hospital (IE)
  • University Hospital of Basel (CH)
  • University of Saskatchewan (CA)
  • Auckland City Hospital (NZ)
  • Oslo University Hospital (NO)
Corresponding author
Lövestam, Elin
ORCID
Venue
Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-02
Volume
119
Issue
2
Pages
225-241
ISSN
2212-2672 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jand.2018.09.002
OpenAlex
W2905046575
Cited by
44
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1
FWCI
3.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Australasian Journal of Paramedicine (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Dietetics, Nutrition, and Education
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Issues, ethics and legal aspects › Nursing Diagnosis and Documentation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
Keywords
Nutrition Care Process, dietitian practice, cross-national comparison
MeSH terms
Health Plan Implementation, Humans, Terminology as Topic, Surveys and Questionnaires, Cohort Studies, Process Assessment, Health Care, Nutrition Therapy, Nutritional Sciences

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review