Cargando…

What could go wrong? Non‐standardized versus standardized food texture classification

BACKGROUND: Texture‐modified foods (TMF) is a common intervention for improving swallowing safety and efficiency for people with dysphagia. Non‐standardized texture classification (NSTC) of foods is used worldwide. However, as this study documents, it can introduce a lack of clarity and confusion ov...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Sella‐Weiss, Oshrat
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9796710/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36398686
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12749
_version_ 1784860547785687040
author Sella‐Weiss, Oshrat
author_facet Sella‐Weiss, Oshrat
author_sort Sella‐Weiss, Oshrat
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Texture‐modified foods (TMF) is a common intervention for improving swallowing safety and efficiency for people with dysphagia. Non‐standardized texture classification (NSTC) of foods is used worldwide. However, as this study documents, it can introduce a lack of clarity and confusion over definitions that can potentially harm patients’ safety. The International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) framework offers international terminology and standardized methods for texture testing that can address this issue AIMS: To document differences between NSTC and standardized texture classification (STC) of the IDDSI, to document changes in the STC in the 30 min following meal delivery, and to explore the relationship between food intake and texture level. METHODS & PROCEDURES: In this observational study, data were collected from 24 long‐term care departments during five meals served to 624 residents, including at least one breakfast, lunch and dinner. To document differences between NSTC and STC, all NSTC food textures used in the LTC facilities were reclassified to match the IDDSI texture level at the time food left the kitchen (n = 1276). To document time‐related changes in texture, the STC texture as food left the kitchen was compared with texture 30 min later (n = 1276). Finally, to explore the relationship between texture and consumption, estimates were made of single‐item food consumption (n = 3820) using a subjective evaluation of consumption percentage OUTCOMES & RESULTS: A total of 1276 food items were classified over the course of five meal services (with at least one each from breakfast, lunch and dinner). Statistically significant differences in NSTC and STC texture levels were found that revealed that residents were consuming food that was more difficult to eat than intended by the TMF prescription. In addition, significant changes in food texture were found over time, with texture levels significantly increasing 30 min after food left the kitchen. Finally, greater consumption was found for softer textures in comparison with regular foods; moreover, food consumption was greatest during breakfast and lowest during lunch. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Residents requiring TMF received harder textures than intended which required complex swallowing ability, thus introducing a choking risk. Using the STC as proposed by the IDDSI could improve patient safety, oral intake and nutritional status. Time‐related changes should also be considered in circumstances where patients do not consume food soon after service. Lastly, reduced food consumption during lunch might negatively impact overall nutrient intake, particularly in cultures where lunch is the main meal of the day. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT: Despite widespread agreement on the importance of STC, institutional care providers widely use NSTC. The IDDSI framework offers international terminology and standardized methods for texture testing. The clinical importance of using STC is not well understood. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE: This study found that residents who required texture‐modified foods were eating food textures that were more challenging to swallow than intended. Differences were found in food texture between when it left the kitchen compared with texture 30 min later. Pureed texture had greater consumption than regular textured food. Food consumption was found to be the highest during breakfast, and reduced during lunch, which might negatively impact overall nutrient intake. WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL OR ACTUAL CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS OF THIS WORK? Accurate food texture prescription is the first step towards increasing patients’ safety. However, food preparation and handling are also very important steps, not to be disregarded. Time‐related changes in food texture are remarkable and should be considered in circumstances where patients do not consume food soon after service, as these can compromise patients’ safety.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9796710
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97967102023-01-04 What could go wrong? Non‐standardized versus standardized food texture classification Sella‐Weiss, Oshrat Int J Lang Commun Disord Research Reports BACKGROUND: Texture‐modified foods (TMF) is a common intervention for improving swallowing safety and efficiency for people with dysphagia. Non‐standardized texture classification (NSTC) of foods is used worldwide. However, as this study documents, it can introduce a lack of clarity and confusion over definitions that can potentially harm patients’ safety. The International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) framework offers international terminology and standardized methods for texture testing that can address this issue AIMS: To document differences between NSTC and standardized texture classification (STC) of the IDDSI, to document changes in the STC in the 30 min following meal delivery, and to explore the relationship between food intake and texture level. METHODS & PROCEDURES: In this observational study, data were collected from 24 long‐term care departments during five meals served to 624 residents, including at least one breakfast, lunch and dinner. To document differences between NSTC and STC, all NSTC food textures used in the LTC facilities were reclassified to match the IDDSI texture level at the time food left the kitchen (n = 1276). To document time‐related changes in texture, the STC texture as food left the kitchen was compared with texture 30 min later (n = 1276). Finally, to explore the relationship between texture and consumption, estimates were made of single‐item food consumption (n = 3820) using a subjective evaluation of consumption percentage OUTCOMES & RESULTS: A total of 1276 food items were classified over the course of five meal services (with at least one each from breakfast, lunch and dinner). Statistically significant differences in NSTC and STC texture levels were found that revealed that residents were consuming food that was more difficult to eat than intended by the TMF prescription. In addition, significant changes in food texture were found over time, with texture levels significantly increasing 30 min after food left the kitchen. Finally, greater consumption was found for softer textures in comparison with regular foods; moreover, food consumption was greatest during breakfast and lowest during lunch. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Residents requiring TMF received harder textures than intended which required complex swallowing ability, thus introducing a choking risk. Using the STC as proposed by the IDDSI could improve patient safety, oral intake and nutritional status. Time‐related changes should also be considered in circumstances where patients do not consume food soon after service. Lastly, reduced food consumption during lunch might negatively impact overall nutrient intake, particularly in cultures where lunch is the main meal of the day. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT: Despite widespread agreement on the importance of STC, institutional care providers widely use NSTC. The IDDSI framework offers international terminology and standardized methods for texture testing. The clinical importance of using STC is not well understood. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE: This study found that residents who required texture‐modified foods were eating food textures that were more challenging to swallow than intended. Differences were found in food texture between when it left the kitchen compared with texture 30 min later. Pureed texture had greater consumption than regular textured food. Food consumption was found to be the highest during breakfast, and reduced during lunch, which might negatively impact overall nutrient intake. WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL OR ACTUAL CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS OF THIS WORK? Accurate food texture prescription is the first step towards increasing patients’ safety. However, food preparation and handling are also very important steps, not to be disregarded. Time‐related changes in food texture are remarkable and should be considered in circumstances where patients do not consume food soon after service, as these can compromise patients’ safety. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-06-15 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9796710/ /pubmed/36398686 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12749 Text en © 2022 The Authors. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Research Reports
Sella‐Weiss, Oshrat
What could go wrong? Non‐standardized versus standardized food texture classification
title What could go wrong? Non‐standardized versus standardized food texture classification
title_full What could go wrong? Non‐standardized versus standardized food texture classification
title_fullStr What could go wrong? Non‐standardized versus standardized food texture classification
title_full_unstemmed What could go wrong? Non‐standardized versus standardized food texture classification
title_short What could go wrong? Non‐standardized versus standardized food texture classification
title_sort what could go wrong? non‐standardized versus standardized food texture classification
topic Research Reports
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9796710/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36398686
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12749
work_keys_str_mv AT sellaweissoshrat whatcouldgowrongnonstandardizedversusstandardizedfoodtextureclassification