Search

Introduction: Palliative care provides a holistic approach and care for patients with a terminal illness and their families. In palliative care physical complaints as well as emotional, social and spiritual aspects are considered. Nutritional care should be also considered within palliative support. For those working in the nutritional support field, to withhold or withdraw nutritional support may be an ethical dilemma in this scenario. The controversy starts when considering nutrition and hydration as basic care or a treatment. The goals of nutrition support in palliative care patients differ from common ones, aiming to improve quality of life, survival or both. The decision should be based on a consideration of prognosis (length of survival), quality of life, and risks-benefits ratio. Regarding oral nutrition (with or without oral supplements) the idea prevails of "comfort feeding", based on providing oral feeding till discomfort or avoidance develop. There is no evidence on the benefit of specific nutrients, despite the fact that omega-3 FAs may have some positive effects in patients with cancer. Regarding nutritional support (enteral or parenteral), no scientific evidence is present, so the decision needs to be agreed according to the desires and beliefs of the patient and their family, and based on a consensus with the interdisciplinary team on the aims of this support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To elaborate a diagnosis of the situation regarding the assistance in the Services and Units of Endocrinology and Nutrition (S°EyN) of the National Health System of Spain (SNHS) and to develop, based on the results obtained, proposals for improvement policies in the S°EyN., Material and Methods: Cross-sectional descriptive study of the patients treated in the S°EyN departments of acute general hospitals of the SNHS in 2016. Data were obtained through RECALSEEN 2017, an "ad hoc" survey designed specifically for this purpose, and the Minimum Basic Data Set of discharges given by the S°EN of the SNHS (2015)., Results: 88 responses of S°EyN have been obtained forma total of 125 acute general hospitals of more than 200 beds installed in the SNHS (70% answers). 47% of the S°EyN respondents were services and 31% sections. The average of endocrinologists by S°EyN was 7.4±4.4, and the average rate of endocrinologists per 100,000 inhabitants was 2.3±1. The most relevant care activities were the consultation (average of 12.3 first consultations per thousand inhabitants and year), day hospital (median of 2,000 sessions/year) and in-hospital consultations (median of 900 in-hospital consultations/year). 83% of S°EyNhad a Clinical Nutrition Unit. The number of dietitians, nutrition technicians and nutritionists in the Clinical Nutrition Unit was low. In relation to quality management, a large margin for improvement was detected; only 35% of S°EyN had a responsible of quality and 38% had implemented process management for those most frequent processes in the unit. There were notable differences in structure, resources and activity of S°EyN between Autonomous Communities., Conclusions: RECALSEEN 2017 survey is a useful tool for the analysis of S°EyN. The remarkable variability found in the structure, activity and management indicators probably indicates significant differences and, therefore, a wide margin for improvement., (Copyright © 2018 SEEN y SED. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)