1
|
Legault M, Leblanc V, Marchand GB, Iceta S, Drolet-Labelle V, Lemieux S, Lamarche B, Michaud A. Evaluation of Dietary Assessment Tools Used in Bariatric Population. Nutrients 2021; 13:nu13072250. [PMID: 34210110 PMCID: PMC8308448 DOI: 10.3390/nu13072250] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2021] [Revised: 06/24/2021] [Accepted: 06/28/2021] [Indexed: 01/23/2023] Open
Abstract
Severe obesity is associated with major health issues and bariatric surgery is still the only treatment to offer significant and durable weight loss. Assessment of dietary intakes is an important component of the bariatric surgery process. Objective: To document the dietary assessment tools that have been used with patients targeted for bariatric surgery and patients who had bariatric surgery and explore the extent to which these tools have been validated. Methods: A literature search was conducted to identify studies that used a dietary assessment tool with patients targeted for bariatric surgery or who had bariatric surgery. Results: 108 studies were included. Among all studies included, 27 used a dietary assessment tool that had been validated either as part of the study per se (n = 11) or in a previous study (n = 16). Every tool validated per se in the cited studies was validated among a bariatric population, while none of the tools validated in previous studies were validated in this population. Conclusion: Few studies in bariatric populations used a dietary assessment tool that had been validated in this population. Additional studies are needed to develop valid and robust dietary assessment tools to improve the quality of nutritional studies among bariatric patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marianne Legault
- Quebec Heart and Lung Institute Research Centre, Université Laval, Québec City, QC G1V 4G5, Canada; (M.L.); (S.I.); (V.D.-L.)
- Centre Nutrition, Santé et Société (NUTRISS), Institut sur la Nutrition et les Aliments Fonctionnels (INAF), Université Laval, Québec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada; (V.L.); (G.B.M.); (S.L.); (B.L.)
| | - Vicky Leblanc
- Centre Nutrition, Santé et Société (NUTRISS), Institut sur la Nutrition et les Aliments Fonctionnels (INAF), Université Laval, Québec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada; (V.L.); (G.B.M.); (S.L.); (B.L.)
| | - Geneviève B. Marchand
- Centre Nutrition, Santé et Société (NUTRISS), Institut sur la Nutrition et les Aliments Fonctionnels (INAF), Université Laval, Québec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada; (V.L.); (G.B.M.); (S.L.); (B.L.)
| | - Sylvain Iceta
- Quebec Heart and Lung Institute Research Centre, Université Laval, Québec City, QC G1V 4G5, Canada; (M.L.); (S.I.); (V.D.-L.)
- Centre Nutrition, Santé et Société (NUTRISS), Institut sur la Nutrition et les Aliments Fonctionnels (INAF), Université Laval, Québec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada; (V.L.); (G.B.M.); (S.L.); (B.L.)
| | - Virginie Drolet-Labelle
- Quebec Heart and Lung Institute Research Centre, Université Laval, Québec City, QC G1V 4G5, Canada; (M.L.); (S.I.); (V.D.-L.)
- Centre Nutrition, Santé et Société (NUTRISS), Institut sur la Nutrition et les Aliments Fonctionnels (INAF), Université Laval, Québec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada; (V.L.); (G.B.M.); (S.L.); (B.L.)
| | - Simone Lemieux
- Centre Nutrition, Santé et Société (NUTRISS), Institut sur la Nutrition et les Aliments Fonctionnels (INAF), Université Laval, Québec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada; (V.L.); (G.B.M.); (S.L.); (B.L.)
| | - Benoît Lamarche
- Centre Nutrition, Santé et Société (NUTRISS), Institut sur la Nutrition et les Aliments Fonctionnels (INAF), Université Laval, Québec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada; (V.L.); (G.B.M.); (S.L.); (B.L.)
| | - Andréanne Michaud
- Quebec Heart and Lung Institute Research Centre, Université Laval, Québec City, QC G1V 4G5, Canada; (M.L.); (S.I.); (V.D.-L.)
- Centre Nutrition, Santé et Société (NUTRISS), Institut sur la Nutrition et les Aliments Fonctionnels (INAF), Université Laval, Québec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada; (V.L.); (G.B.M.); (S.L.); (B.L.)
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Mechanick JI, Apovian C, Brethauer S, Timothy Garvey W, Joffe AM, Kim J, Kushner RF, Lindquist R, Pessah-Pollack R, Seger J, Urman RD, Adams S, Cleek JB, Correa R, Figaro MK, Flanders K, Grams J, Hurley DL, Kothari S, Seger MV, Still CD. Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Perioperative Nutrition, Metabolic, and Nonsurgical Support of Patients Undergoing Bariatric Procedures - 2019 Update: Cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2020; 28:O1-O58. [PMID: 32202076 DOI: 10.1002/oby.22719] [Citation(s) in RCA: 136] [Impact Index Per Article: 34.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2019] [Accepted: 10/09/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society (TOS), American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS), Obesity Medicine Association (OMA), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, algorithms, and checklists. METHODS Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts. RESULTS New or updated topics in this CPG include: contextualization in an adiposity-based chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current health care arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest). CONCLUSIONS Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory, with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeffrey I Mechanick
- Guideline Task Force Chair (AACE); Professor of Medicine, Medical Director, Marie-Josée and Henry R. Kravis Center for Clinical Cardiovascular Health at Mount Sinai Heart; Director, Metabolic Support Divisions of Cardiology and Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Bone Disease, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York; Past President, AACE and ACE
| | - Caroline Apovian
- Guideline Task Force Co-Chair (TOS); Professor of Medicine and Director, Nutrition and Weight Management, Boston University School of Medicine and Boston Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Stacy Brethauer
- Guideline Task Force Co-Chair (ASMBS); Professor of Surgery, Vice Chair of Surgery, Quality and Patient Safety; Medical Director, Supply Chain Management, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - W Timothy Garvey
- Guideline Task Force Co-Chair (AACE); Butterworth Professor, Department of Nutrition Sciences, GRECC Investigator and Staff Physician, Birmingham VAMC; Director, UAB Diabetes Research Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Aaron M Joffe
- Guideline Task Force Co-Chair (ASA); Professor of Anesthesiology, Service Chief, Otolaryngology, Oral, Maxillofacial, and Urologic Surgeries, Associate Medical Director, Respiratory Care, University of Washington, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Julie Kim
- Guideline Task Force Co-Chair (ASMBS); Harvard Medical School, Mount Auburn Hospital, Cambridge, Massachusetts
| | - Robert F Kushner
- Guideline Task Force Co-Chair (TOS); Professor of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Richard Lindquist
- Guideline Task Force Co-Chair (OMA); Director, Medical Weight Management, Swedish Medical Center; Director, Medical Weight Management, Providence Health Services; Obesity Medicine Consultant, Seattle, Washington
| | - Rachel Pessah-Pollack
- Guideline Task Force Co-Chair (AACE); Clinical Associate Professor of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, NYU Langone Health, New York, New York
| | - Jennifer Seger
- Guideline Task Force Co-Chair (OMA); Adjunct Assistant Professor, Department of Family and Community Medicine, Long School of Medicine, UT Health Science Center, San Antonio, Texas
| | - Richard D Urman
- Guideline Task Force Co-Chair (ASA); Associate Professor of Anesthesia, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Stephanie Adams
- Writer (AACE); AACE Director of Clinical Practice Guidelines Development, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - John B Cleek
- Writer (TOS); Associate Professor, Department of Nutrition Sciences, University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Riccardo Correa
- Technical Analysis (AACE); Assistant Professor of Medicine and Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism Fellowship Director, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - M Kathleen Figaro
- Technical Analysis (AACE); Board-certified Endocrinologist, Heartland Endocrine Group, Davenport, Iowa
| | - Karen Flanders
- Writer (ASMBS); Massachusetts General Hospital Weight Center, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jayleen Grams
- Writer (AACE); Associate Professor, Department of Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham; Staff Surgeon, Birmingham VA Medical Center, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Daniel L Hurley
- Writer (AACE); Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, Metabolism, and Nutrition, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Shanu Kothari
- Writer (ASMBS); Fellowship Director of MIS/Bariatric Surgery, Gundersen Health System, La Crosse, Wisconsin
| | - Michael V Seger
- Writer (OMA); Bariatric Medical Institute of Texas, San Antonio, Texas, Clinical Assistant Professor, University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Christopher D Still
- Writer (TOS); Medical Director, Center for Nutrition and Weight Management Director, Geisinger Obesity Institute; Medical Director, Employee Wellness, Geisinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Pratt GM, McLees B, Pories WJ. The ASBS Bariatric Surgery Centers of Excellence program: a blueprint for quality improvement. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2006; 2:497-503; discussion 503. [PMID: 17015199 DOI: 10.1016/j.soard.2006.07.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 79] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2006] [Revised: 07/18/2006] [Accepted: 07/19/2006] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Variations in the techniques of bariatric surgery, coupled with the lack of a common database, has led to variable and, sometimes negative, outcomes from bariatric surgery. Thus, in November 2003, the American Society for Bariatric Surgery established Surgical Review Corporation (SRC) as an independent nonprofit entity for quality control of bariatric surgery and as a resource for data collection and analysis. METHODS In November 2003, the leadership of the American Society for Bariatric Surgery founded SRC as an independent nonprofit entity for quality control of bariatric surgery and as resource for research. A national set of standards for the Bariatric Surgery Centers of Excellence program was developed using a meta-analysis of the relevant published English language data, a consensus conference at Georgetown University, and participation by stakeholders from industry, third-party payors, and malpractice carriers. A software program was developed to provide uniformity in data collection and ease of analysis. RESULTS SRC developed standards that have been accepted by the bariatric surgical community and put in place. A system was developed for the designation of two levels for the centers, provisional and full. The growth of the Centers of Excellence program has been rapid. At present, 135 hospitals and 265 surgeons have achieved full approval. The centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services have recognized the program. On the basis of the reports of 55,567 patients from the first 176 applicants for full approval and confirmed by SRC during site inspections, the 90-day operative mortality rate was 0.35%. CONCLUSIONS The first phase of development has gone well. Future steps include the development of a network of bariatric physicians and the development of a consortium for research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gary M Pratt
- Surgical Review Corporation, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Yeats M, Wedergren S, Fox N, Thompson JS. The use and modification of clinical pathways to achieve specific outcomes in bariatric surgery. Am Surg 2005; 71:152-4. [PMID: 16022015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/03/2023]
Abstract
Clinical pathways are promoted for standardizing patient care and decreasing resource use without compromising outcome. Once established, we hypothesized that clinical pathways can then be used to modify patient care to achieve specific goals. Our aim was to evaluate a clinical pathway for the bariatric surgical patient that was initially designed to standardize care and later altered to modify the postoperative course. We retrospectively reviewed 150 consecutive patients undergoing open gastric bypass by a single surgeon. The first 50 patients were managed without a formal pathway, (group I). The next 50 were managed with a pathway that standardized care in order to reduce length of stay (LOS), (group II). For the final 50 patients, the pathway was modified to shorten nasogastric decompression time (group III). Patient information, blood loss (EBL), operative time, length of stay (LOS), nasogastric decompression, 30-day complication rates, and early readmissions were reviewed. The groups were similar with respect to gender, age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, and EBL. Operative time was significantly less in groups II and III compared to group I (82% and 68% vs. 38% <180 minutes, P < 0.05). LOS was shorter in groups II and III compared to group I (62% and 42% vs. 20% with a 4-day LOS, P < 0.05). Duration of nasogastric tube decompression was successfully decreased in group III when compared to groups I and II (76% vs. 14% and 6% 1 day or less, P < 0.05). Complication rates were significantly lower in group III as well (14% vs. 36% and 28%, P < 0.05). Standardizing patient care with a clinical pathway decreases LOS after bariatric surgery. An established clinical pathway can then be used to further modify patient care in order to achieve specific goals, such as shortened time of nasogastric decompression. This goal was accomplished without compromising patient outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melania Yeats
- Department of Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska 68198, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
20
|
Weiner RA, Pomhoff I, Schramm M, Weiner S, Blanco-Engert R. New advances in laparoscopic treatment of morbid obesity. Surg Technol Int 2004; 13:79-90. [PMID: 15744679] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/02/2023]
Abstract
The prevalence of obesity in the United States (U.S.) is increasing to epidemic proportions. Currently, more than 60% of Americans and 51% of Germans are overweight. Whereas a variety of medications are available for treatment of obesity, none results in the long-term loss of more than 10% of body weight. The current standard for treatment of severe obesity, defined as a body mass index (BMI) of greater than 35 kg/m2 with comorbidities and generally greater than 40 kg/m2, is surgical. Several surgical procedures are currently available, including gastric bypass, biliopancreatic diversion (BPD) with duodenal switch, and the adjustable gastric band. These operations may be performed using laparoscopic surgical techniques to minimize perioperative morbidity and postoperative recovery time. To optimize the outcome of this type of procedure, bariatric surgery should be performed on carefully selected patients, in bariatric centers specially equipped to care for the obese, within a broadly based, multidisciplinary setting that provides lifelong postoperative care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rudolf A Weiner
- Department of Surgery, Krankenhaus Sachsenhausen-Frankfurt, Germany
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|