Search

Objectives: Patients' adherence to enteral administration of nutrients is influenced by their feeling during administration. The present study compared the taste of commercially prepared ice cream with that of enteral nutrient ice cream, using a sensory test. Additionally, the factors influencing the comprehensive evaluation of enteral nutrient ice cream and commercially prepared ice cream were identified. Methods: A sensory test was performed by 30 pharmacists, on commercially prepared ice cream and enteral nutrient ice cream using the Semantic Differential Method. The factors related to comprehensive evaluation were extracted, and those influencing the comprehensive evaluation of ice cream were analyzed by Covariance structure analysis. Results: No significant differences were observed in the comprehensive evaluation of enteral nutrient ice cream and commercially prepared ice cream (p = 0.08, 95% CI = −0.78 to 0.04). Covariance structure analysis identified five factors related to Easy-to-intake (i.e., Taste, Ease to ingest, Continuity, Peculiar flavor, and Familiarity), which strongly influenced Comprehensive evaluation (standardized estimated value: 0.88). In addition, four factors related to discomfort factor (i.e., Feeling of heaviness, Concentration of taste, Greasiness, and Milky smell) were found not to influence Comprehensive evaluation directly but were correlated with Ease-to-intake (standardized estimate: 0.64). Conclusion: It is important for healthcare professionals to understand the factors involved in the comprehensive evaluation of enteral nutrients, and they should provide appropriate information about it.

Aims: It is necessary for medical staff to fully understand disparities in the comprehensive evaluation of enteral nutrients due to differences in their physical form. In this study, we compared the overall rating of each enteral nutrient with respect to form and examined the factors that influence their overall evaluation. Methods: Sensory tests were conducted on 261 pharmaceutical students using the Sematic Differential method. Comparison of comprehensive evaluations for each form of enteral nutrient was carried out for liquids (room temperature, warm, cold), jelly (solid), and mousse (semi-solid) forms. Additionally, factors influencing the comprehensive evaluation of enteral nutrients were investigated using covariance structure analysis. Results: Overall evaluation of each enteral nutrient form showed the jelly was rated highest (2.57 ± 1.49), followed by the warm liquid (2.53 ± 1.29), cold liquid (2.42 ± 1.20), room temperature liquid (2.26 ± 1.20), and the mousse (1.93 ± 1.07). From the result of factor analysis, four factors (flavor, richness, presence, and texture) were extracted. Covariance structure analysis of factors affecting the overall rating revealed that flavor had a significant influence (fitness index: GFI=0.908, AGFI=0.878, RMSEA=0.074, AIC=912.742). Conclusion: Differences in the form of enteral nutrients affected the overall satisfaction of patients. It is important for medical staff, including pharmacists, to deepen their understanding of factors related to the overall rating of enteral nutrients in order to meet the needs of patients.