Simple training tool is insufficient for appropriate diagnosis and treatment of malnutrition: A pre-post intervention study in a tertiary center.

OBJECTIVES To improve malnutrition awareness and management in our department of general internal medicine; to assess patients' nutritional risk; and to evaluate whether an online educational program leads to an increase in basic knowledge and more frequent nutritional therapies. METHODS A prospective pre-post intervention study at a university department of general internal medicine was conducted. Nutritional screening using Nutritional Risk Score 2002 (NRS 2002) was performed, and prescriptions of nutritional therapies were assessed. The intervention included an online learning program and a pocket card for all residents, who had to fill in a multiple-choice questions (MCQ) test about basic nutritional knowledge before and after the intervention. RESULTS A total of 342 patients were included in the preintervention phase, and 300 were in the postintervention phase. In the preintervention phase, 54.1% were at nutritional risk (NRS 2002 ≥3) compared with 61.7% in the postintervention phase. There was no increase in the prescription of nutritional therapies (18.7% versus 17.0%). Forty-nine and 41 residents (response rate 58% and 48%) filled in the MCQ test before and after the intervention, respectively. The mean percentage of correct answers was 55.6% and 59.43%, respectively (which was not significant). Fifty of 84 residents completed the online program. The residents who participated in the whole program scored higher on the second MCQ test (63% versus 55% correct answers, P = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS Despite a high ratio of malnourished patients, the nutritional intervention, as assessed by nutritional prescriptions, is insufficient. However, the simple educational program via Internet and usage of NRS 2002 pocket cards did not improve either malnutrition awareness or nutritional treatment. More sophisticated educational systems to fight malnutrition are necessary.

Effects of a Transdiagnostic Internet Intervention («velibra») for Anxiety Disorders in Primary Care: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Internet-based cognitive behavioral self-help treatment (ICBT) for anxiety disorders has shown promising results in several trials, but there is yet a lack of studies of ICBT in „real world” primary care settings. In this randomized controlled trial we recruited participants through general practitioners. The aim of the study was to examine whether treatment-as-usual (TAU) in primary care settings plus ICBT is superior to TAU alone in reducing anxiety symptoms and other outcome measures among individuals meeting diagnostic criteria of a least one of three anxiety disorders (social anxiety disorder, panic disorder with or without agoraphobia, generalized anxiety disorder). 150 adults fulfilling diagnostic criteria for a least one of the anxiety disorders according to a diagnostic interview are randomly assigned to one of the two conditions: TAU plus ICBT versus TAU. Randomization is stratified by primary disorder, medication (yes/no) and concurrent psychotherapy. ICBT consists of a transdiagnostic and tailored Internet-based self-help program for several anxiety disorders which also includes cognitive bias modification for interpretation (CBM-I). Primary outcomes are symptoms of disorder-specific anxiety measures and diagnostic status after the intervention (9 weeks). Secondary outcomes include primary outcomes at 3-month follow-up and secondary measures such as general symptomatology, depression, quality of life, adherence to ICBT and satisfaction with ICBT. The study is currently being completed. Primary results along with results for specific subgroups (e.g. primary diagnosis, concurrent medication and/or psychotherapy) will be presented and discussed.

Efficacy of an Internet-based, individually tailored smoking cessation program: A randomized trial

Introduction: Self-help computer-based programs are easily accessible and cost-effective interventions with a great recruitment potential. However, each program is different and results of meta-analyses may not apply to each new program; therefore, evaluations of new programs are warranted. The aim of this study was to assess the marginal efficacy of a computer-based, individually tailored program (the Coach) over and above the use of a comprehensive Internet smoking cessation website. Methods: A two-group randomized controlled trial was conducted. The control group only accessed the website, whereas the intervention group received the Coach in addition. Follow-up was conducted by e-mail after three and six months (self-administrated questionnaires). Of 1120 participants, 579 (51.7%) responded after three months and 436 (38.9%) after six months. The primary outcome was self-reported smoking abstinence over four weeks. Results: Counting dropouts as smokers, there were no statistically significant differences between intervention and control groups in smoking cessation rates after three months (20.2% vs. 17.5%, p¼0.25, odds ratio (OR)¼1.20) and six months (17% vs. 15.5%, p¼0.52, OR¼1.12). Excluding dropouts from the analysis, there were statistically significant differences after three months (42% vs. 31.6%, p¼0.01, OR¼1.57), but not after six months (46.1% vs. 37.8%, p¼0.081, OR¼1.41). The program also significantly increased motivation to quit after three months and self-efficacy after three and six months. Discussion: An individually tailored program delivered via the Internet and by e-mail in addition to a smoking cessation website did not significantly increase smoking cessation rates, but it increased motivation to quit and self-efficacy.