二村 昭彦

Abstract Background This study aimed to clarify the effectiveness of nutrition support team (NST) facilities for preventing central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI). Methods We retrospectively analyzed the incidence of CLABSI as well as the presence or absence of additional medical fees for NST activity between 2019 and 2021, including the period before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Subsequently, we performed between-group comparisons of the CLABSI incidence. CLABSI rates were compared based on cumulative per 1000 catheter uses during the relevant period. Results Among 47 facilities that were registered for participation, there were 34 and 13 facilities with and without additional medical fees for NST activity (NST and non-NST groups, respectively). The CLABSI incidence rate was significantly lower in the NST group 0.96 [0.28–1.73] than in the non-NST group 1.25 [075–6.10] (p < 0.05). Before the pandemic, the NST group had a lower CLABSI rate per 1000 catheter uses than the non-NST group 2019: 0.70 [0.12–1.26] vs 2.10 [0.62–5.97]. During the pandemic, the CLABSI incidence showed no significant between-group difference 2020: 0.99 [0.51–1.61] vs 1.01 [0.80–4.16]; 2021: 1.24 [0.44–2.35] vs 1.96 [1.23–5.31]; however, the CLABSI rates in the NST group remained low. Conclusion During the COVID-19 pandemic, the incidence of CLABSI was lower in the NST group than in the non-NST group, indicating the effectiveness of NST in preventing the occurrence of CLABSI.

Introduction: Healthy eating and weight control are recommended for cancer survivors; however, dietary interventions are not routinely offered to them. This study aimed to assess the effects of dietary interventions on survival, nutritional status, morbidity, dietary changes, health-related quality of life (QOL), and clinical measures in cancer survivors. Methods: Searches were conducted from October 1, 2018 to November 21, 2011 in the Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Emcare, and DARE electronic databases. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that involved individuals diagnosed with cancer, excluding conference abstracts, case studies, other reviews, and meta-analyses, and screened the articles. Results: Eight studies were included in this meta-analysis. We observed significant improvements in QOL and clinical data in 3 of 6 studies and in one study, respectively, significant weight loss on anthropometry in 2 of 5 studies, and dietary improvement in 4 of 5 studies of adult cancer survivors. However, we did not observe any benefits of dietary intervention for cancer survivors with undernutrition. Discussion: Dietary interventions for adult cancer survivors might contribute to improving their nutritional status; however, further clarification requires a study that standardizes the intervention method. Furthermore, RCTs are required to determine the effects on cancer survivors with undernutrition.