Work

Personalized nutrition products in a hospital setting: A prospective proof-of-concept study of acceptability in hospitalized patients and staff

Year: 2026

Type: preprint

Abstract: Background & Aims Personalized nutrition has the potential to improve nutritional intake and clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients by adapting to individual dietary needs and preferences. Despite its promise, no personalized nutrition product (PNP) for hospitalized patients is currently available. This study aimed to assess the acceptability of PNPs among hospitalized patients and hospital staff. Methods A prospective, ten-days, proof-of-concept study was conducted among in-hospital adult patients (≥ 18y). Study patients received a freshly 3D printed PNP, customized to match individual taste preferences and health profiles. Patients could reorder the product daily if they remained hospitalized >24h after consumption. Consumption was assessed by weighing the PNP before and after consumption. Acceptability, sensory feedback, and overall experience were evaluated using questionnaires. Hospital staff also evaluated sensory feedback and acceptability. Factors influencing consumption and liking among patients were evaluated by testing within-group differences. Correlations between consumption rates, liking and patient characteristics were assessed. Results Eighty-seven patients received 137 PNPs during the study period. The average overall liking score was 5.7 (±2.1) on a 1 – 9 scale, and median consumption rate was 51% [Interquartile Range 19 – 100]. Consumption rates positively correlated with overall liking (R 2 = 0.50, p < 0.001). Patients’ willingness to reorder was 3.5 (±2.3) on a 1–7 scale, and reorder rate 63%. The perceived value of a PNP service in a hospital setting (scale 1 – 7) was scored 5.3 (±1.7) by patients and 4.5 (±1.1) by staff. Conclusions PNPs were evaluated as moderately positive in terms of acceptability and value by both patients and staff. However, further optimization of the product is needed before evaluating clinical efficacy.

Source: medRxiv

DOI: 10.64898/2026.10.01.26364528