Assessment of a self-reported Drinks Diary for the estimation of drinks intake by care home residents: Fluid Intake Study in the Elderly (FISE)

Objectives: We evaluated the accuracy of a newly developed self-completed Drinks Diary in care home residents and compared it with direct observation and fluid intake charts. Design: Observational study. Setting: Residential care homes in Norfolk, UK. Participants: 22 elderly people (18 women, mean age 86.6 years SD 8.6, 12 with MMSE scores <27). Measurements: Participants recorded their own drinks intake over 24 hours using the Drinks Diary while care staff used the homes’ usual fluid intake chart to record drinks intake. These records were compared with drinks intake assessed by researcher direct observation (reference method), during waking hours (6am to 10pm), while drinks taken from 10pm to 6am were self-reported and checked with staff. Results: Drinks intake assessed by the Drinks Diary was highly correlated with researcher direct observation (Pearson correlation coefficient r=0.93, p<0.001, mean difference -163ml/day) while few staff-completed fluid charts were returned and correlation was low (r=0.122, p=0.818, mean difference 702ml/day). The Drinks Diary classified 19 of 22 participants correctly as drinking enough or not using both the European Food Safety Authority and US recommendations. Conclusion: The Drinks Diary estimate of drinks intake was comparable with direct observation and more accurate (and reliably completed) than staff records. The Drinks Diary can provide a reliable estimate of drinks intake in elderly care home residents physically and cognitively able to complete it. It may be useful for researchers, care staff and practitioners needing to monitor drinks intake of elderly people, to help them avoid dehydration

Global, regional, and national age-sex-specific mortality and life expectancy, 1950-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017

Background: Assessments of age-specific mortality and life expectancy have been done by the UN Population Division, Department of Economics and Social Affairs (UNPOP), the United States Census Bureau, WHO, and as part of previous iterations of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD). Previous iterations of the GBD used population estimates from UNPOP, which were not derived in a way that was internally consistent with the estimates of the numbers of deaths in the GBD. The present iteration of the GBD, GBD 2017, improves on previous assessments and provides timely estimates of the mortality experience of populations globally. Methods: The GBD uses all available data to produce estimates of mortality rates between 1950 and 2017 for 23 age groups, both sexes, and 918 locations, including 195 countries and territories and subnational locations for 16 countries. Data used include vital registration systems, sample registration systems, household surveys (complete birth histories, summary birth histories, sibling histories), censuses (summary birth histories, household deaths), and Demographic Surveillance Sites. In total, this analysis used 8259 data sources. Estimates of the probability of death between birth and the age of 5 years and between ages 15 and 60 years are generated and then input into a model life table system to produce complete life tables for all locations and years. Fatal discontinuities and mortality due to HIV/AIDS are analysed separately and then incorporated into the estimation. We analyse the relationship between age-specific mortality and development status using the Socio-demographic Index, a composite measure based on fertility under the age of 25 years, education, and income. There are four main methodological improvements in GBD 2017 compared with GBD 2016: 622 additional data sources have been incorporated; new estimates of population, generated by the GBD study, are used; statistical methods used in different components of the analysis have been further standardised and improved; and the analysis has been extended backwards in time by two decades to start in 1950. Findings: Globally, 18·7% (95% uncertainty interval 18·4–19·0) of deaths were registered in 1950 and that proportion has been steadily increasing since, with 58·8% (58·2–59·3) of all deaths being registered in 2015. At the global level, between 1950 and 2017, life expectancy increased from 48·1 years (46·5–49·6) to 70·5 years (70·1–70·8) for men and from 52·9 years (51·7–54·0) to 75·6 years (75·3–75·9) for women. Despite this overall progress, there remains substantial variation in life expectancy at birth in 2017, which ranges from 49·1 years (46·5–51·7) for men in the Central African Republic to 87·6 years (86·9–88·1) among women in Singapore. The greatest progress across age groups was for children younger than 5 years; under-5 mortality dropped from 216·0 deaths (196·3–238·1) per 1000 livebirths in 1950 to 38·9 deaths (35·6–42·83) per 1000 livebirths in 2017, with huge reductions across countries. Nevertheless, there were still 5·4 million (5·2–5·6) deaths among children younger than 5 years in the world in 2017. Progress has been less pronounced and more variable for adults, especially for adult males, who had stagnant or increasing mortality rates in several countries. The gap between male and female life expectancy between 1950 and 2017, while relatively stable at the global level, shows distinctive patterns across super-regions and has consistently been the largest in central Europe, eastern Europe, and central Asia, and smallest in south Asia. Performance was also variable across countries and time in observed mortality rates compared with those expected on the basis of development. Interpretation: This analysis of age-sex-specific mortality shows that there are remarkably complex patterns in population mortality across countries. The findings of this study highlight global successes, such as the large decline in under-5 mortality, which reflects significant local, national, and global commitment and investment over several decades. However, they also bring attention to mortality patterns that are a cause for concern, particularly among adult men and, to a lesser extent, women, whose mortality rates have stagnated in many countries over the time period of this study, and in some cases are increasing

Water as an essential nutrient: the physiological basis of hydration.

How much water we really need depends on water functions and the mechanisms of daily water balance regulation. The aim of this review is to describe the physiology of water balance and consequently to highlight the new recommendations with regard to water requirements. Water has numerous roles in the human body. It acts as a building material; as a solvent, reaction medium and reactant; as a carrier for nutrients and waste products; in thermoregulation; and as a lubricant and shock absorber. The regulation of water balance is very precise, as a loss of 1% of body water is usually compensated within 24 h. Both water intake and water losses are controlled to reach water balance. Minute changes in plasma osmolarity are the main factors that trigger these homeostatic mechanisms. Healthy adults regulate water balance with precision, but young infants and elderly people are at greater risk of dehydration. Dehydration can affect consciousness and can induce speech incoherence, extremity weakness, hypotonia of ocular globes, orthostatic hypotension and tachycardia. Human water requirements are not based on a minimal intake because it might lead to a water deficit due to numerous factors that modify water needs (climate, physical activity, diet and so on). Water needs are based on experimentally derived intake levels that are expected to meet the nutritional adequacy of a healthy population. The regulation of water balance is essential for the maintenance of health and life. On an average, a sedentary adult should drink 1.5 l of water per day, as water is the only liquid nutrient that is really essential for body hydration