Skip to content

Study to Compare Strategies to Improve Detection of Nutritional Disorders in Hospitalized Adults (Compass Project)

Study to Compare Strategies to Improve Detection of Nutritional Disorders in Hospitalized Adults (Compass Project)

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02845895
Acronym
CompaS
Enrollment
916
Registered
2016-07-27
Start date
2014-09-30
Completion date
2016-10-31
Last updated
2017-11-29

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Nutritional Disorder

Keywords

Screening for nutritional disorder, Comparison of two organizations, Indicator IPAQSS

Brief summary

The prevalence of malnutrition in hospital is very high (30 percent) with major consequences in terms of morbidity and mortality, generating significant health care costs. The positive impact of its support is demonstrated. The HAS (French High Sanitary Authority) recommends a screening of all adult hospitalized in the first 48 hours, with no consensus regarding the organization of screening within care services. Various strategies have been implemented. Although this screening is part of the nursing role, old and recent studies show that it is not done systematically and nutritional disorders are largely under-diagnosed and therefore untreated. The investigators assume that an organization of screening for eating disorders, based on a caregiver dedicated to this activity, improves the indicator IPAQSS (Indicateurs Pour l'Amélioration de la Qualité et de la Sécurité des Soins) which is an indicator for the improvement of the quality and security of care) Screening indicator of nutritional disorders Level 3, compared to an organization classic involving the care teams in their entirety. This indicator reflects the care system performance. In this study, patients will have no intervention. Only the organization of the care staff will be adapted but with no changes on the care of patients?

Detailed description

Undernutrition in the hospital is a public health issue. The impacts of this malnutrition are known , with consequences clearly established on the morbidity, mortality and quality of life. Undernutrition is an independent risk factor for mortality (5). In terms of morbidity, the most frequently reported consequences are infections, postoperative complications (delayed healing, in particular nosocomial infections, risk of pressure ulcers) and pejorative impact on the prognosis of chronic diseases such as respiratory failure , heart and kidney. Malnutrition therefore affects the length of hospital stays and the burden of care. Many studies have shown the positive impact of the medical care of malnutrition on morbidity and mortality, whether intervention studies in general hospital population or in specific pathologies. But there is no systematic screening strategy undernutrition implementation in hospitals. The investigators assume that the organization of screening for eating disorders based on a caregiver specifically dedicated to this activity, improves the indicator IPAQSS Screening indicator of nutritional disorders level 3 compared with a classic organization shared between different actors of care. This indicator reflects the care system performance This organization must advance quickly and significantly the number of patients evaluated nutritionally and help reach a level of completeness close to 100%.

Interventions

OTHERCaregiver dedicated

Organization of nutrition screening with the help of a caregiver

OTHERClassic strategy

Classic organization with the training of the department team

Sponsors

University Hospital, Toulouse
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Patients admitted in medicine-surgery-obstetrics department * Patient over 18 years

Exclusion criteria

* Patient hospitalized less than 48 hours * Patients under 18 years

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Change of patients responding at the level 3 of IPAQSS criterionBefore the surgery and 6 months after the surgery

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change of patients responding at the level 2 of IPAQSS criterionBefore the surgery and 6 months after the surgery
Change of the cost-efficiencyBefore the surgery and 6 months after the surgeryThe cost of hospitalization between the 2 arms will be compared
Change of patients responding at the level 3 and level 2 of IPAQSS criterion15 months after the surgery

Countries

France

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026