why group work does not work

B

L

MS

L

SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 25

POSTER SESSION: PROFESSIONAL SKILLS; NUTRITION ASSESSMENT; MEDICAL NUTRITION THERAPY

Why Group Work Does Not Work

Author(s): C. N. Anstrom; Olivet Nazarene University,ourbonnais, IL

earning Outcome: Participants will recognize the need for aformal model to teach group work to aid in the development ofskills needed in a diversified professional environment.

It is essential that dietetic students bring skills to theprofessional environment enabling them to successfully interactwith groups in a diverse marketplace. The literature reports alack of these skills in new hires. The purpose of this study was toinvestigate why university students are not acquiring groupwork skills by investigating university faculty members’perceptions, knowledge base, and experiences related to the useof group work in their classrooms. Research was conducted in thefall of 2009 based on the Social Interdependence Theory. Aqualitative design incorporating a case study methodology wasused. Twenty-two faculty members from a small Midwesternuniversity participated. Thematic analysis of transcribed fieldnotes from 26 document reviews, 24 classroom observations, andfour focus groups was completed using NVivo 8 software andrevealed the following: 1). faculty perceived that group workenhanced student learning, 2). faculty received no training in theuse of group work models as undergraduates, 3). faculty hadconditional receptiveness to learning about the use of a groupwork model in the classroom. These findings indicated: 1). groupwork model is not being used to teach group work skills tostudents and, 2). Faculty need to participate in professionaldevelopment that addresses using an organized model in theclassrooms. Using the group work model to train faculty is key.

Funding Disclosure: None

Implementing Telehealth Outpatient Nutrition Consults:Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center’s Experience

Author(s): B. Isaacs-Jordan, V. McLymont, K. Lambrou,. Pennella, M. Sandone; Food and Nutrition Services, Memorial

loan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY

earning Outcome: The participant will be able to applylessons learned from one facility in setting up their owntelehealth nutrition program for their outpatient nutritionservices.

Patient participation at outpatient nutrition counseling centerscan be a challenge, especially for the sick, the elderly, and whenthere are barriers to easy transportation. New technology andinternet video calling software such as Skype, now provides anopportunity for patients to no longer make the trip to thehealthcare institution for all of their outpatient services.

At Memorial-Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) in NewYork, telehealth outpatient nutrition consults were implementedwhich have now enabled both patients and participants of theEmployee Health and Wellness Program to participate in visitswith a registered dietitian from their home or from one ofMSKCC’s many off-site locations. This poster session will shareMSKCC’s experience in setting up telehealth nutrition consultsand will provide feedback on it’s impact on patient care.

Funding Disclosure: None

A-22 / September 2011 Suppl 2—Abstracts Volume 111 Number 9

Meal Planning Behaviors of Working Adults

Author(s): A. Moore, K. Eliot; Nutrition and Dietetics, SaintLouis University, Saint Louis, MO

Learning Outcome: After reading this abstract, participantswill be able to report the barriers to meal planning identified bythe surveyed population.

The purpose of this study was to identify meal planningbehaviors practiced by working adults. To evaluate mealplanning behaviors, the researchers created the “Meal PlanningBehaviors” survey. The 16-item survey asks questions regardingdemographics, household grocery shopping and meal planningbehaviors. When asked about planning meals in advance,respondents indicated that if meals were not planned in advancethere would not be a family evening meal and that they find iteasier to prepare a meal if it is planned in advance. The twomost important factors survey respondents considered whendeciding what to have for their evening meals were that it isquick and easy and nutritionally balanced. When meals were notplanned in advance, the most common evening meal would bemade from ingredients on hand in the home. Prior research hasindicated that a planned meal is a healthier meal, howeverresults from our survey indicate that among survey respondents,barriers of time, uncertain evening schedules and lack of menuideas prevent them from planning a meal in advance. From thestudy results it is clear that nutrition education needs to focuson how to incorporate meal planning into busy schedules ofworking adults and how to ensure the ingredients in clients’pantries are wholesome for those unplanned meals made fromingredients on hand.

Funding Disclosure: None

Validity of Electronic Assessment Methods Compared toRegistered Dietitian Analysis of Diet Records

Author(s): A. J. Scheett, L. K. Johnson, S. K. Raatz; USDA,ARS, Human Nutrition Research Center, Grand Forks, ND

Learning Outcome: Participants will be able to discuss thepotential benefits of electronic diet recording.

Assessment of dietary intake by diet records (DR) is a standardresearch and practice tool. However, manual entry and analysisof DR is time-consuming. New electronic tools for diet entry byclients and research participants may reduce the RegisteredDietitian (RD) effort spent in diet entry. In order to determinethe validity of electronic DR, we compared responses to 3-day DRkept by Tap & Track™ software for the Apple iPod touch™ andrecords kept on the Nutrihand® website to DR entered by theRD into a customized USDA program for 12 participants in anongoing study. During two tracking periods, participants keptwritten DR and were randomly assigned to one of each of theelectronic methods. Although not statistically different, relativeto the corresponding RD entered DR, concordance of theelectronic records was as follows (Mean % � SD; Nutrihand®and Tap & Track™, respectively): energy 96.7 � 15.1, 93.2 �39.8; carbohydrate 102.5 � 18.7, 96.2 � 37.3; fiber 86.9 � 20.0,76.5 � 36.7; sugar 83.2 � 27.8, 104.5 � 43.4; protein 90.8 �18.4, 90.2 � 43.0; fat 93.1 � 17.7, 91.4 � 47.7; sodium 94.4 �30.0, 104.2 � 55.0. In comparison to RD entered 3-day DR,electronic methods resulted in no significant difference in meansbut much larger variability, particularly with Tap & Track™.Electronic DR capture may be appropriate for diet monitoringand to reduce RD work load.

Funding Disclosure: USDA 5450-51000-042-00D