Alimentação hospitalar: proposições para a qualificação do Serviço de Alimentação e Nutrição, avaliadas pela comunidade científica

The scope of this paper is to validate proposals used to qualify hospital food by the Brazilian scientific community. An electronic questionnaire was applied to clinical nutrition professionals registered on the Lattes Platform (Brazilian database of institutions and researchers' curricula in the areas of Science and Technology). The questionnaire incorporated a Likert scale and had spaces for comments. The themes dealt with patient participation, the nutritional and sensory quality of hospital diets, and planning and goals of the Hospital Food and Nutrition Service (HFNS). The questionnaire also asked for the top five priorities for a HFNS. Proposals with total or partial adherence equal to or greater than 70% were considered to be approved. All proposals had total adherence equal to or greater than 70%. The proposal that had minimal adherence (70%) was the one that proposed that nutritional intervention must be arranged by mutual agreement with the patient. The proposal that had maximal adherence (93%) was the one advocating that there must be statistical control on diets prescribed by the HFNS. The most cited priorities referred to infrastructure and training of human resources (40%), the quality of hospital food (27%) and the nutritional status of the patient.

Motivation and frustration in cardiology trial participation: the patient perspective

OBJECTIVE: The participation of humans in clinical cardiology trials remains essential, but little is known regarding participant perceptions of such studies. We examined the factors that motivated participation in such studies, as well as those that led to participant frustration. METHODS: Patients who had participated in hypertension and coronary arterial disease (phases II, III, and IV) clinical trials were invited to answer a questionnaire. They were divided into two groups: Group I, which included participants in placebo-controlled clinical trials after randomization, and Group II, which included participants in clinical trials in which the tested treatment was compared to another drug after randomization and in which a placebo was used in the washout period. RESULTS: Eighty patients (47 patients in Group I and 33 patients in Group II) with different socio-demographic characteristics were interviewed. Approximately 60% of the patients were motivated to participate in the trial with the expectation of personal benefit. Nine participants (11.2%) expressed the desire to withdraw, which was due to their perception of risk during the testing in the clinical trial (Group I) and to the necessity of repeated returns to the institution (Group II). However, the patients did not withdraw due to fear of termination of hospital treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Although this study had a small patient sample, the possibility of receiving a benefit from the new tested treatment was consistently reported as a motivation to participate in the trials.