Background: The dietary intake of hospitalised patients is often compromised during hospitalisation, which can be a causal factor for hospital malnutrition. This is considered a public health problem worldwide and is associated with an increased risk of other complications. Objectives: Our objective was to determine the dietary intake of hospitalised individuals and if the prescribed diet influences it. Methods: Food intake data were collected from 299 lunches of patients admitted to a hospital, using the visual estimation method with a five-point scale. Three existing diets were considered, and the energy and macronutrient values of the meal were calculated. The minimum energy and protein requirements were also calculated. Results: The components of the tray with the highest intake were soup and dessert; no significant differences were found between the percentage intake of each element and the prescribed diet. More than 50% of the individuals did not meet their minimum energy requirements, and only 36.5% had a protein intake that was within the recommendations. Conclusions: Dietary intake is much lower than prescribed, and nutritionists need to act to reduce the prevalence of hospital malnutrition.

Background: Lung cancer (LC) patients are prone to suffer from malnutrition. Malnutrition negatively affects patients’ response to therapy, increases the incidence of treatment-related side effects, and decreases survival. Early identification of LC patients who are malnourished or at risk of malnutrition can promote recovery and improve prognosis. Objective: This study aimed to assess the risk and nutritional status of lung cancer patients who are hospitalised, as well as to evaluate the impact of nutritional intervention on the risk of malnutrition. Methods: From January 2022 to December 2023, 53 LC patients hospitalised in a pulmonology department had their nutritional risk (initial and final) and nutritional status (initial) assessed. All were selected for nutritional intervention. Nutrition counselling was the first intervention option, along with dietary changes with/without oral nutritional supplements. Results: At the time of hospitalisation, 90.6% of the patients were at nutritional risk, 45.3% were classified as moderately malnourished, and 35.8% were classified as severely underweight. After the hospitalisation, 73.6% were at nutritional risk at the time of discharge, suggesting a statistically significant decrease in the number of patients with nutritional risk. Conclusions: Most LC patients hospitalised presented an altered nutritional status. Our study suggests that a nutritional intervention must be implemented to reduce malnutrition risk, which may impact prognosis. The comprehensive nutritional problems experienced by LC patients require nutritional assessment and improved individually tailored nutritional support.

Background/Objectives: Family-related factors are central to type 1 diabetes (T1D) management during childhood and adolescence. This systematic review aimed to synthesise the available evidence on the associations between parental feeding practices, child eating and mealtime behaviours, and glycaemic, nutritional and other diabetes-related outcomes in children and adolescents with T1D. Methods: This systematic review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 statement and prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261291514). PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched without publication date restrictions. Observational studies including children and adolescents aged 0–18 years with T1D and examining parental feeding practices or child eating/mealtime behaviours in relation to diabetes-related outcomes were eligible. Family mealtime functioning was considered as a secondary construct when examined within otherwise eligible feeding- or mealtime-focused studies. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Owing to substantial heterogeneity in study populations, constructs, assessment instruments and outcomes, findings were synthesised narratively. Results: Eleven reports representing nine unique studies were included. Most studies were cross-sectional and involved predominantly preschool and younger school-aged children, with limited representation of adolescents. Associations between feeding and mealtime-related factors and diabetes-related outcomes varied across studies and constructs. Greater child mealtime problems and specific disruptive mealtime behaviours were associated with higher HbA1c or less favourable glucose-related measures in some analyses, while aspects of family mealtime functioning were associated with dietary adherence or glucose measurements outside the target range. Parental feeding practices, including restriction and pressure to eat, showed inconsistent or null associations with glycaemic outcomes. Associations were also reported with diet quality, carbohydrate intake and mealtime behaviours, although effect direction and magnitude varied, and null findings were common. Evidence from continuous glucose monitoring-derived outcomes was limited. Conclusions: Parental feeding practices and child mealtime behaviours may be associated with glycaemic, dietary and behavioural outcomes in paediatric T1D, while family mealtime functioning emerged as a relevant secondary contextual construct. However, the available evidence is heterogeneous and predominantly cross-sectional. These constructs should not be considered interchangeable dimensions of parental control, and current evidence does not establish directionality or causality, nor demonstrate that modifying feeding or mealtime practices improves glycaemic outcomes. Further longitudinal and intervention studies using clearly defined constructs, developmentally diverse samples, and objective glycaemic measures are needed.