Disease-related malnutrition (DRM) affects approximately a third of hospitalized patients and is associated with an increased risk of morbimortality. However, DRM is often underdiagnosed and undertreated. Our aim is to evaluate the prognostic value of morphofunctional tools and tests for nutritional assessment in clinical practice. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify studies relating to the morphofunctional assessment of nutritional status and mortality or complications. Evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) method. Twelve GRADE recommendations were made and divided into seven topics: food intake and nutrient assimilation, anthropometry, biochemical analysis, hand grip strength, phase angle, muscle imaging, and functional status and quality of life. From these recommendations, 37 statements were developed and scored in a two-survey Delphi method by 183 experts. A consensus was reached on accepting 26/37 statements. Surveys had high internal consistency and high inter-rater reliability. In conclusion, evidence-based recommendations were made on the prognostic value of morphofunctional assessment tools and tests to assess malnutrition, most of which were found to be feasible in routine clinical practice, according to expert opinions.
Background: Cancer-related malnutrition is still unrecognized and undertreated in clinical practice. The morphofunctional assessment of disease-related malnutrition (DRM) is a new approach that focuses on evaluating changes in body composition and function. The aim of this study is to evaluate the prognostic value of classic and emerging assessment of malnutrition at 12-months survival in cancer patients. Methods. We conducted a prospective study on cancer outpatients. Bioelectrical impedance with phase angle (PhA), nutritional ultrasound by rectus femoris cross-sectional area (RFCSA), hand grip strength, and “Timed Up and Go Test” (TUG) were evaluated as predictors of mortality. Results. Fifty-seven patients were included. The non-survivors had lower PhA values than the survivors (4.7° vs. 5.4°; p < 0.001), and we had the same results with RFCSA 2.98 cm2/m2 vs. 4.27 cm2/m2 (p = 0.03). Cut-off points were identified using the ROC (receiver operating characteristic) curves for PhA (≤5.6° cancer patients, ≤5.9° men, ≤5.3° women), RFCSA (≤4.47 cm2/m2 cancer patients, ≤4.47° men, ≤2.73° women) and rectus femoris-Y-axis (RF-Y-axis; ≤1.3 cm cancer patients, ≤1.06 men, ≤1 women). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, we found that high PhA was significantly associated with a lower mortality hazard ratio (HR:0.42 95% CI:0.21–0.84, p = 0.014). Likewise, high RFCSA was associated with a decrease in mortality risk in the crude model (HR 0.61 95% CI 0.39–0.96, p = 0.031). This trend was also maintained in the adjusted models by the confounding variables. Conclusions. Low PhA and RFCSA values are significant independent predictors of mortality in cancer patients. These cut-off points are clinical data that can be used for nutritional assessment and the prediction of clinical outcomes.
Phase angle (PhA) has been identified as a poor prognostic factor in patients with COVID-19. This study aimed to achieve a systematic review, where we discussed the potential role of PhA value as a prognostic marker of adverse clinical outcomes such as mortality and complication in hospitalized with SARS-CoV2 infection and established the strength of recommendations for use. A systematic literature review with meta-analysis was done in the main electronic databases from 2020 to January 2023. The selected articles had to investigate adverse consequences of the COVID-19 population and raw bioimpedance parameters such as PhA and published in peer-reviewed journals. GRADE tools regarded the quality of the methodology. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO. Only eight studies, 483 studies, were eligible for the analysis. In general, differences in PhA were seen between the comparative study groups. Patients with a low PhA experienced poor outcomes. A low PhA was associated with a significantly increased mortality risk [RR: 2.44; 95% CI (1.20–4.99), p = 0.01; I2 = 79% (p = 0.0008)] and higher complications risk [OR: 3.47, 95% CI (1.16 – 10.37), p = 0.03; I2 = 82% (p = 0.004)] in COVID-19 patients. Our analysis showed four evidence-based recommendations on the prognostic value of PhA with two strong recommendations, one of moderate and another of low-moderate quality, for predicting mortality and complications, respectively. We recommend using PhA as a prognostic marker for mortality and complications in this population. Although the results are promising, future studies must identify the PhA cut-off to guide therapeutic decisions more precisely.Registration code in PROSPERO: CRD42023391044
Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is the most widely used technique in body composition analysis. When we focus the use of phase sensitive BIA on its raw parameters Resistance (R), Reactance (Xc) and Phase Angle (PhA), we eliminate the bias of using predictive equations based on reference models. In particular PhA, have demonstrated their prognostic utility in multiple aspects of health and disease. In recent years, as a strong association between prognostic and diagnostic factors has been observed, scientific interest in the utility of PhA has increased. In the different fields of knowledge in biomedical research, there are different ways of assessing the impact of a scientific-technical aspect such as PhA. Single frequency with phase detection bioimpedance analysis (SF-BIA) using a 50 kHz single frequency device and tetrapolar wrist-ankle electrode placement is the most widely used bioimpedance approach for characterization of whole-body composition. However, the incorporation of vector representation of raw bioelectrical parameters and direct mathematical calculations without the need for regression equations for the analysis of body compartments has been one of the most important aspects for the development of research in this area. These results provide new evidence for the validity of phase-sensitive bioelectrical measurements as biomarkers of fluid and nutritional status. To enable the development of clinical research that provides consistent results, it is essential to establish appropriate standardization of PhA measurement techniques. Standardization of test protocols will facilitate the diagnosis and assessment of the risk associated with reduced PhA and the evaluation of changes in response to therapeutic interventions. In this paper, we describe and overview the value of PhA in biomedical research, technical and instrumental aspects of PhA research, analysis of Areas of clinical research (cancer patients, digestive and liver diseases, critical and surgical patients, Respiratory, infectious, and COVID-19, obesity and metabolic diseases, Heart and kidney failure, Malnutrition and sarcopenia), characterisation of the different research outcomes, Morphofunctional assessment in disease-related malnutrition and other metabolic disorders: validation of PhA with reference clinical practice techniques, strengths and limitations. Based on the detailed study of the measurement technique, some of the key issues to be considered in future PhA research. On the other hand, it is important to assess the clinical conditions and the phenotype of the patients, as well as to establish a disease-specific clinical profile. The appropriate selection of the most critical outcomes is another fundamental aspect of research.
The determination of the metrics to evaluate the figure of medical science liaison (MSL) presents certain difficulties, as there is a great deal of variability. Therefore, the aim of the present exploratory study is to evaluate the metrics for evaluating MSL performance that are currently being used by the medical departments of the pharmaceutical industry in Spain by using the Delphi methodology with two rounds of participation. After the first round, experts reached a consensus in 20 (38.5%) of 52 items: 18 in agreement and 2 in disagreement. In the second round, they established consensus in 8 (25.0%) of the remaining items. Overall, consensus was met in 28/52 (53.8%) items: 23 in agreement (44.2%) and 5 in disagreement (9.6%). No consensus was reached in 24 items (46.2%). On the general metrics, there was consensus agreement that the weight of each of these metrics should vary according to the product life cycle (96%), and disagreement that performance assessment should be done through a combination of quantitative (92%) and qualitative (80%) metrics. This study provides the company with greater knowledge to establish and adapt its strategies without losing focus on delivering value in the relationships with healthcare professionals and patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.