How does the platform prevent dietary errors and catch malnutrition risk early?
Expected outcome
Nutrition risk and intake evidence
Modeled from workflow design and industry benchmarks. No customer communities measured yet — figures are targets, not validated results. See Industry Findings for methodology.
The problem
A resident on a mechanical soft diet gets regular food. A diabetic’s carb count is not tracked. The kitchen runs on memory and sticky notes.
How the platform runs it
Every dietary restriction and preference is visible in real time. Meal tracking captures intake percentages by resident. Food cost per resident per day is reported alongside menu planning and inventory. When intake drops — for example, below 50% for three consecutive days — a nutrition screening recommendation is surfaced for clinician review, and weight changes correlate with intake trends.
On the shift
The dietary manager opens the morning report: three residents flagged for >5% weight loss in the past 30 days, two on supplements with documented intake under 75%, and one new pureed-diet order from yesterday’s swallow study. The system has already routed the weight-loss residents into the nutrition care committee and queued the dietary consultations. Tray cards reflect today’s orders, and CNAs document intake at the bedside on a tablet.
What the outcome looks like
Evidence focus: dietary restrictions, intake history, weight trends, and nutrition-review triggers are visible for care-team review. No dietary-error or cost outcome is claimed here.
What goes wrong without it
On a fragmented stack, weights live in nursing, intake lives on a paper meal record, and dietary changes are faxed. Weight loss is noticed at the monthly meeting; supplements are ordered for residents who would have done fine with fortified meals; tray-card errors generate complaints that the dining manager hears at the family town hall.
Where this connects in the platform
Every clinical workflow runs on the same record. These are the feature pages, head-to-head comparisons, and pillar articles that go deeper on the surfaces this workflow touches.
Feature surfaces
Compared head-to-head
Clinical and quality references
Clinical workflows on this page run against the CMS RAI/MDS manual, the Quality Measure technical specifications, and the recognized clinical practice guidelines published by AGS, IDSA, and the Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurses Society.
- Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual
CMS
The binding rulebook for MDS assessment timing, item coding, and look-back windows that drive both quality measures and PDPM scoring.
- MDS 3.0 Quality Measures User's Manual
CMS
Technical specifications for the long- and short-stay quality measures reported on Care Compare.
- Beers Criteria for Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use in Older Adults
American Geriatrics Society
Reference standard for psychotropic stewardship and high-risk medication review in older adults.
- CDC / NHSN Long-Term Care Facility Component
CDC
Definitions and surveillance protocols for UTI, respiratory, and multidrug-resistant organism tracking used in infection control.