A consensus scheme for diagnosing malnutrition in adults in clinical settings on a global scale is proposed. Next steps are to secure further collaboration and endorsements from leading nutrition professional societies, to identify overlaps with syndromes like cachexia and sarcopenia, and to promote dissemination, validation studies, and feedback. The diagnostic construct should be re-considered every 3-5 years.

A consensus scheme for diagnosing malnutrition in adults in clinical settings on a global scale is proposed. Next steps are to secure endorsements from leading nutrition professional societies, to identify overlaps with syndromes like cachexia and sarcopenia, and to promote dissemination, validation studies, and feedback. The construct should be re-considered every 3-5 years.

Summary Rationale This initiative is focused on building a global consensus around core diagnostic criteria for malnutrition in adults in clinical settings. Methods In January 2016, the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) was convened by several of the major global clinical nutrition societies. GLIM appointed a core leadership committee and a supporting working group with representatives bringing additional global diversity and expertise. Empirical consensus was reached through a series of face‐to‐face meetings, telephone conferences, and e‐mail communications. Results A two‐step approach for the malnutrition diagnosis was selected, i.e., first screening to identify “at risk” status by the use of any validated screening tool, and second, assessment for diagnosis and grading the severity of malnutrition. The malnutrition criteria for consideration were retrieved from existing approaches for screening and assessment. Potential criteria were subjected to a ballot among the GLIM core and supporting working group members. The top five ranked criteria included three phenotypic criteria (weight loss, low body mass index, and reduced muscle mass) and two etiologic criteria (reduced food intake or assimilation, and inflammation or disease burden). To diagnose malnutrition at least one phenotypic criterion and one etiologic criterion should be present. Phenotypic metrics for grading severity as Stage 1 (moderate) and Stage 2 (severe) malnutrition are proposed. It is recommended that the etiologic criteria be used to guide intervention and anticipated outcomes. The recommended approach supports classification of malnutrition into four etiology‐related diagnosis categories. Conclusion A consensus scheme for diagnosing malnutrition in adults in clinical settings on a global scale is proposed. Next steps are to secure further collaboration and endorsements from leading nutrition professional societies, to identify overlaps with syndromes like cachexia and sarcopenia, and to promote dissemination, validation studies, and feedback. The diagnostic construct should be re‐considered every 3–5 years.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Malnutrition in critically ill adults in the intensive care unit (ICU) is associated with a significantly elevated risk of mortality. Adequate nutrition therapy is crucial to optimise outcomes. Currently, there is a paucity of such data in Latin America. Our aims were to characterise current clinical nutrition practices in the ICU setting in Latin America and evaluate whether current practices meet caloric and protein requirements in critically ill patients receiving nutrition therapy. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, retrospective, observational study in eight Latin American countries (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Panama, and Peru). Eligible patients were critically ill adults hospitalised in the ICU and receiving enteral nutrition (EN) and/or parenteral nutrition (PN) on the Screening Day and the previous day (day −1). Caloric and protein balance on day -1, nutritional status, and prescribed nutrition therapy were recorded. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of reaching daily caloric and protein targets. Results: The analysis included 1053 patients from 116 hospitals. Evaluation of nutritional status showed that 74.1% of patients had suspected/moderate or severe malnutrition according to the Subjective Global Assessment. Prescribed nutrition therapy included EN alone (79.9%), PN alone (9.4%), and EN + PN (10.7%). Caloric intake met >90% of the daily target in 59.7% of patients on day -1; a caloric deficit was present in 40.3%, with a mean (±SD) daily caloric deficit of -688.8 ± 455.2 kcal. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that combined administration of EN + PN was associated with a statistically significant increase in the probability of meeting >90% of daily caloric and protein targets compared with EN alone (odds ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-2.39; p = 0.038). Conclusions: In the ICU setting in Latin America, malnutrition was highly prevalent and caloric intake failed to meet targeted energy delivery in 40% of critically ill adults receiving nutrition therapy. Supplemental administration of PN was associated with improved energy and protein delivery; however, PN use was low. Collectively, these findings suggest an opportunity for more effective utilisation of supplemental PN in critically ill adults who fail to receive adequate nutrition from EN alone.

The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) provides consensus criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition that can be widely applied. The GLIM approach is based on the assessment of three phenotypic (weight loss, low body mass index, and low skeletal muscle mass) and two etiologic (low food intake and presence of disease with systemic inflammation) criteria, with diagnosis confirmed by any combination of one phenotypic and one etiologic criterion fulfilled. Assessment of muscle mass is less commonly performed than other phenotypic malnutrition criteria, and its interpretation may be less straightforward, particularly in settings that lack access to skilled clinical nutrition practitioners and/or to body composition methodologies. In order to promote the widespread assessment of skeletal muscle mass as an integral part of the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition, the GLIM consortium appointed a working group to provide consensus‐based guidance on assessment of skeletal muscle mass. When such methods and skills are available, quantitative assessment of muscle mass should be measured or estimated using dual‐energy x‐ray absorptiometry, computerized tomography, or bioelectrical impedance analysis. For settings where these resources are not available, then the use of anthropometric measures and physical examination are also endorsed. Validated ethnic‐ and sex‐specific cutoff values for each measurement and tool are recommended when available. Measurement of skeletal muscle function is not advised as surrogate measurement of muscle mass. However, once malnutrition is diagnosed, skeletal muscle function should be investigated as a relevant component of sarcopenia and for complete nutrition assessment of persons with malnutrition.