Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,234 studies31 sourcesUpdated 20 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BYThe journal of nutrition, health & aging

Malnutrition risk and nutritional interventions among older hospitalised patients with and without dementia: a multicentre nine-year study.

  1. 1Medical University of Graz, Institute of Nursing Science, Graz, Austria. Electronic address: [email protected].
  2. 2Medical University of Graz, Institute of Nursing Science, Graz, Austria.

Abstract

Objectives

To (1) describe the prevalence of malnutrition risk in older hospitalised patients with and without dementia across annual cross-sectional assessments between 2017 and 2025; (2) examine nutritional interventions among older hospitalised patients at malnutrition risk with and without dementia between 2017 and 2025; and (3) identify clinical and demographic factors associated with the co-occurrence of dementia and malnutrition risk.Design

Multicentre, cross-sectional secondary data analysis.Setting

Austrian acute care hospitals participating in the Nursing Quality Measurement 2.0 (LPZ) between 2017 and 2025.Participants

A total of 9,991 hospitalised patients aged ≥65 years were included; 616 (6.2%) had a documented dementia diagnosis, 2,369 (23.7%) were at risk of malnutrition, and 144 (1.4%) had both dementia and malnutrition risk.Measurements

Data collection included a standardized questionnaire using patient interviews, clinical assessments, and review of medical records. Malnutrition risk was assessed using the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST). Dementia diagnoses were based on ICD-10 documentation. Thirteen nutritional interventions were recorded dichotomously. Group comparisons and multivariable logistic regression analyses (with co-occurrence of dementia and malnutrition risk according to MUST as the dependent variable) were performed.Results

The overall malnutrition risk was 23.7% and did not differ between patients with and without dementia (23.4% vs. 23.7%, = 0.840). Among patients at malnutrition risk, those with dementia more frequently received mealtime assistance (59.7% vs. 15.3%, p < 0.001), modification of the mealtime environment (57.6% vs. 26.3%, p < 0.001), texture-modified diets (47.9% vs. 16.7%, p < 0.001), enriched diets (47.5% vs. 16.0%, p < 0.001) and oral nutritional supplements (28.5% vs. 19.2%, p = .008) than those without dementia. Between 2017 and 2025, the use of several nutritional interventions varied. The co-occurrence of dementia and malnutrition risk was independently associated with female sex (OR 1.56, CI 1.07-2.29), higher age (OR 1.07 per year, CI 1.04-1.09), end-of-life condition (OR 1.89, CI 1.21-2.95), higher number of medical diagnoses (OR 1.37, CI 1.24-1.50), and greater care dependency (OR 0.95 per CDS point, CI 0.94-0.96) in the multivariable analysis.Conclusion

Older hospitalised patients with dementia and malnutrition risk received a broad range of nutritional interventions in routine clinical practice, particularly interventions supporting oral intake. Nevertheless, variation in nutritional care and the comparatively modest use of some guideline-recommended interventions indicate a need for further research on the appropriateness and implementation of nutritional care in this population.

Related

  1. Practical Approaches to Nutritional Interventions for Malnutrition, Sarcopenia, and Frailty in Community-Dwelling Older Adults and Care Home Populations: A Narrative Review
    Haya Khalaf, Camilla Hopwood, Caryn Straker +3
    NutrientsPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textNutritionEurope PMC
  2. Protocol for the Nutrition OUtReach In Systems of Healthcare (NOURISH) trial: a phase II multicentre, parallel-group randomised controlled trial of medically tailored groceries to prevent malnutrition in transplant and cellular therapy patients
    Madison Kurth, Asuka Suzuki, Jamie S Myers +16
    BMJ OpenPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC 4.0Full textGeneral medicineCrossref
  3. Nutritional Interventions for Patients with Intermittent Claudication: Mechanisms, Clinical Implications, and the Case for Exercise-Adjunct Strategies: A Narrative Review
    Journal of cardiovascular development and diseasePeer-reviewedCC BYFull textCardiovascular medicineEurope PMC
  4. Global leadership initiative on malnutrition-based nutritional phenotype and factors associated with the outcomes of hospitalized patients managed by a nutrition support team: A retrospective study
    Mathilde Barrallier, Emeric Rageul, Charlotte Nesseler +2
    Clinical Nutrition ESPENPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full text3 citedPhysiologyHAL
  5. Impact of malnutrition and nutritional support on infectious complications in critically ill infants and children
    Jason S. Kerstein, Julia K. Weld, Daniel T. Mulhall +5
    Frontiers in pediatricsPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMCPMC
BibTeX
@article{eglseer2026malnutrition,
  title = {{Malnutrition risk and nutritional interventions among older hospitalised patients with and without dementia: a multicentre nine-year study.}},
  author = {Doris Eglseer and Silvia Bauer},
  journal = {The journal of nutrition, health \& aging},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.1016/j.jnha.2026.101007},
  url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42887093},
  note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Malnutrition risk and nutritional interventions among older hospitalised patients with and without dementia: a multicentre nine-year study.
AU  - Doris Eglseer
AU  - Silvia Bauer
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/16
JO  - The journal of nutrition, health & aging
DO  - 10.1016/j.jnha.2026.101007
UR  - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42887093
AB  - Objectives  To (1) describe the prevalence of malnutrition risk in older hospitalised patients with and without dementia across annual cross-sectional assessments between 2017 and 2025; (2) examine nutritional interventions among older hospitalised patients at malnutrition risk with and without dementia between 2017 and 2025; and (3) identify clinical and demographic factors associated with the co-occurrence of dementia and malnutrition risk.Design  Multicentre, cross-sectional secondary data analysis.Setting  Austrian acute care hospitals participating in the Nursing Quality Measurement 2.0 (LPZ) between 2017 and 2025.Participants  A total of 9,991 hospitalised patients aged ≥65 years were included; 616 (6.2%) had a documented dementia diagnosis, 2,369 (23.7%) were at risk of malnutrition, and 144 (1.4%) had both dementia and malnutrition risk.Measurements  Data collection included a standardized questionnaire using patient interviews, clinical assessments, and review of medical records. Malnutrition risk was assessed using the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST). Dementia diagnoses were based on ICD-10 documentation. Thirteen nutritional interventions were recorded dichotomously. Group comparisons and multivariable logistic regression analyses (with co-occurrence of dementia and malnutrition risk according to MUST as the dependent variable) were performed.Results  The overall malnutrition risk was 23.7% and did not differ between patients with and without dementia (23.4% vs. 23.7%, = 0.840). Among patients at malnutrition risk, those with dementia more frequently received mealtime assistance (59.7% vs. 15.3%, p < 0.001), modification of the mealtime environment (57.6% vs. 26.3%, p < 0.001), texture-modified diets (47.9% vs. 16.7%, p < 0.001), enriched diets (47.5% vs. 16.0%, p < 0.001) and oral nutritional supplements (28.5% vs. 19.2%, p = .008) than those without dementia. Between 2017 and 2025, the use of several nutritional interventions varied. The co-occurrence of dementia and malnutrition risk was independently associated with female sex (OR 1.56, CI 1.07-2.29), higher age (OR 1.07 per year, CI 1.04-1.09), end-of-life condition (OR 1.89, CI 1.21-2.95), higher number of medical diagnoses (OR 1.37, CI 1.24-1.50), and greater care dependency (OR 0.95 per CDS point, CI 0.94-0.96) in the multivariable analysis.Conclusion  Older hospitalised patients with dementia and malnutrition risk received a broad range of nutritional interventions in routine clinical practice, particularly interventions supporting oral intake. Nevertheless, variation in nutritional care and the comparatively modest use of some guideline-recommended interventions indicate a need for further research on the appropriateness and implementation of nutritional care in this population.
SN  - 1760-4788
ER  -