Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics of interview participants

From: Optimising an intervention to support home-living older adults at risk of malnutrition: a qualitative study

 

Think aloud: General practice

n/16 (%)

Think aloud: Snowballing

n/7 (%)

Process evaluation

n/18 (%)

Age range

 65–74

3 (13)

1 (4)

8 (44)

 75–84

7 (30)

5 (22)

9 (50)

 85–94

5 (22)

1 (4)

1 (6)

 Missing data

1 (4)

0

0

Gender –

Female

9 (39)

7 (30)

11 (61)

Male

7 (30)

0 (0)

7 (39)

Health conditions (self-report)

 Cancer (not in current treatment)

2

0

2

 Cardiovascular

7

3

8

 Depression

1

4

2

 Epilepsy

2

0

0

 Eye conditions

1

1

0

 Gastrointestinal

3

0

3

 Leg ulcers

0

1

0

 Musculoskeletal

7

6

2

 Respiratory

6

0

6

 Urinary tract

2

0

1

 Missing data

1

1

0

Self-rated health in last weeka

  

n/a

 1–3 = Poor to very poor

1 (4)

1 (4)

 

 4 = Average

5 (22)

2 (9)

 

 5–7 = Good to excellent

10 (43)

4 (17)

 

Sheltered accommodation

2 (9)

0

n/a

Living alone

7 (30)

7 (30)

8 (44)

Recent hospital admission

(last 6 months)

2 (9)

2 (9)

2 (12)

Bereavement in last year

2 (9)

1 (4)

n/a

Help to shop or cook

6 (36)

2 (9)

n/a

Indicators of low appetite / malnutrition riskb

n/a

  

 MUST score = 1 or more

  

10 (56)

 SNAQ score = 13 or less

  

12 (67)

 BMI = 20 or less

  

6 (33)

 Unintended weight loss in last 3 months

  

9 (50)

Considered ‘at risk’ by family

 

7 (100)

n/a

  1. Note: aSelf-related health: “How would you rate your overall health during the past week? On a score of 1 to 7, where 1 is very poor and 7 is very good”
  2. b Self-report or nurse-measured MUST (Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool); SNAQ (Simplified Nutritional Appetite Questionnaire); BMI (weight/height2)