4.5 Article

Improving the provision of meals in hospital. The patients' viewpoint

期刊

APPETITE
卷 54, 期 1, 页码 181-185

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2009.10.005

关键词

Hospital meals; Patients' meals; NHS; Patients' perceptions; Food service management

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This Study examines the provision of hospital meals from the patients' viewpoint, with the aim of improving hospital food service. Patients were approached in early 2008 in a National Health Service hospital in the South of England and invited to comment on the good and bad aspects of eating in hospital. Comments were collected in an abbreviated key word format which incurred the minimum of bias and allowed emergent themes to be analysed both quantitatively and qualitatively. Seven main themes emerged, of which food and choice were mentioned most frequently, but had a low ratio (1.8 and 1.7, respectively) of approving over disapproving comments. The next most mentioned theme, service staff, showed the highest approving/disapproving ratio (4.8) overall. Less frequent themes were: meals and lifestyle, timing and routine, service quality and food quantity. These data, together with qualitative analysis of the responses showed patients' views of hospital food to be positive, on the whole meeting Or Surpassing their expectations. However, these expectations were low, the experience of eating in hospital contrasted unfavourably with home, and the meals were at best a distraction from the rigours Of hospital treatment. Service staff were positively regarded because they offered an important opportunity for normal discourse with a non-medical person. On the basis of the findings, changes are recommended in the management of service staff, menus, food presentation, nutritional intake and patients' lifestyle. Of these, the first is likely to have most impact on the experience and viewpoint of hospital patients. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据