Nutritional Intake Monitoring for Nursing Home Residents: A Comparison of Staff Documentation, Direct Observation, and Photography Methods
Abstract
Background The current approach to assessing nutritional intake requires nursing home (NH) staff to document total percentage of food and fluid consumed at each meal. Because NH staff tend to significantly overestimate total food intake, methods need to be developed to improve the accuracy of food intake measurement. Objective To compare three methods of assessing the nutritional intake of NH residents. Research design Validation Study. Subjects Fifty-six NH residents in one facility. Measures Total percentage of food and fluid intake of each resident for each of nine meals, or all three meals for 3 consecutive days, was assessed by: (1) Nursing home staff chart documentation, (2) Research staff documentation according to direct observations, and (3) Research staff documentation according to photographs of residents' trays before and after each meal. Results Research staff documentation of total intake and intake of all individual food and fluid items was similar for the direct observation and photography methods. In comparison with these two methods, NH staff documentation reflected a significant overestimate (22%) of residents' total intake levels. In addition, NH staff failed to identify the more than half (53%) of those residents whose intake levels were equal to or below 75% for most meals. Conclusions The photography method of nutritional assessment yielded the same information as direct observations by research staff, and both of these methods showed the intake levels…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Poor ability to assess drink intake in residential and nursing care facilities has been reported numerous times.
“This poor ability to assess drink intake in residential and nursing care facilities has been reported numerous times (232-235).”
From ESPEN practical guideline: Clinical nutrition and hydration in geriatrics (2022) · cites this paper as [235]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 18 · Cited by 123
- Authors
- Simmons, S. F., & Reuben, D.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- Corresponding author
- Simmons, Sandra F.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-02
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 209-213
- ISSN
- 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-5415
- OpenAlex
- W2080109070
- Cited by
- 123
- References
- 18
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 12.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (5r01ag013013-04)
- National Institute on Aging (P60-AG10415, P60AG010415, 5R01 AG13013)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutrition and Health Studies
- Keywords
- nursing home residents, food intake measurement, direct observation, older adults, long-term care nutrition
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Beverages, Eating, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Food, Humans, Male, Nursing Homes, Nursing Staff, Photography, Records, Reproducibility of Results, Nutrition Assessment, Multivariate Analysis
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