AYMES Shake Jucy Tolerance and Acceptability Study

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    AYMES Shake Jucy Tolerance and Acceptability Study

  • IRAS ID

    170213

  • Contact name

    Roger Wertheim-Aymes

  • Contact email

    raymes@aymes.com

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    0 years, 0 months, 14 days

  • Research summary

    Is AYMES Shake Jucy acceptable and tolerated by participants requiring oral nutritional supplements (ONS) to improve their nutritional status?

    Oral nutritional support may be essential for people who are unable to meet their nutritional needs solely from food and fluids. This is particularly the case for those who are in nursing/residential care, requiring encouragement with meals or on a fortified diet.

    AYMES Shake Jucy is an ONS that can be made up as needed to meet the nutritional needs of patients in a community setting.
    In order to increase the variety of supplements available, AYMES International Ltd has developed a new ONS product that now requires tolerability and acceptability testing. The product is presented as a powder that is then mixed with water to produce a nutritionally-dense ‘juice-style’ drink. The aim of this study is to test the acceptability of this product looking at weight changes, volume taken, tolerance and participants’ views.

    Ideally 25 residents of UK-based, non-NHS, nursing/residential homes who require additional oral nutritional support through ONS will be recruited to the study. They will be monitored daily whilst they continue with their current ONS for 3 days (baseline) and then will be changed to AYMES Shake Jucy for 2 days (washout) and 7 days (intervention). Each participant will therefore be on the study for 14 days.

    This study is being carried out by the Dietitians and Health Care Professionals and sponsored by AYMES International Ltd.

  • REC name

    East of England - Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    14/EE/1290

  • Date of REC Opinion

    5 Jan 2015

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion