Evaluation of malnutrition risk of inpatients in a research and training hospital: A cross-sectional study

Celik, Zehra Margot; İslamoğlu, Ayşe; Sabuncular, Güleren; Toprak, Hatice; Güneş, Fatma

doi:10.1016/j.clnesp.2020.12.002

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Energy and protein (n = 81, 52%) were the main nutrients quantified (12,17,25 . Micronutrients were quantified in eighteen studies (12%) in combination with energy and protein or all macronutrients (Figure 4) (21,40,52,53,66,74,81,87,92,102,113,120,141,142,145,149,151,161) .…”

Section: Synthesis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dietary assessment methods for measurement of oral intake in acute care and critically ill hospitalised patients: a scoping review

Ferguson,

Tatucu-Babet,

Amon

et al. 2023

Nutr. Res. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantification of oral intake within the hospital setting is required to guide nutrition care. Multiple dietary assessment methods are available, yet details regarding their application in the acute care setting are scarce. This scoping review, conducted in accordance with JBI methodology, describes dietary assessment methods used to measure oral intake in acute and critical care hospital patients. The search was run across four databases to identify primary research conducted in adult acute or critical care from 1st January 2000-15th March 2023 which quantified oral diet with any dietary assessment method. In total, 155 articles were included, predominantly from the acute care setting (n=153, 99%). Studies were mainly single-center (n=138, 88%) and of observational design (n=135, 87%). Estimated plate waste (n=59, 38%) and food records (n=42, 27%) were the most frequent assessment methods with energy and protein the main nutrients quantified (n=81, 52%). Validation was completed in 23 (15%) studies, with the majority of these using a reference method reliant on estimation (n=17, 74%). A quarter of studies (n=39) quantified completion (either as complete versus incomplete or degree of completeness) and four studies (2.5%) explored factors influencing completion. Findings indicate a lack of high-quality evidence to guide selection and application of existing dietary assessment methods to quantify oral intake with a particular absence of evidence in the critical care setting. Further validation of existing tools and identification of factors influencing completion is needed to guide the optimal approach to quantification of oral intake in both research and clinical contexts.

show abstract

Section: Synthesis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dietary assessment methods for measurement of oral intake in acute care and critically ill hospitalised patients: a scoping review

Ferguson,

Tatucu-Babet,

Amon

et al. 2023

Nutr. Res. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…NRS2002 is the preferred tool for nutritional risk screening of hospitalized patients. [9,10] PG-SGA is mainly used for nutritional assessment of cancer patients. [3,11] abPG-SGA is the short form of PG-SGA, which forgoes the physical exam, disease/condition, and metabolic considerations, but retains weight, eating, changes in activity and assessment of digestive tract symptoms.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The value of abPG-SGA in the nutritional risk screening of patients with malignant tumors

Zhang,

et al. 2024

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nutritional risk screening 2002 (NRS2002) is a commonly used tool for screening the risk of malnutrition in hospitalized patients, while patient-generated subjective global assessment (PG-SGA) is a nutritional assessment tool for malignant tumor patients. However, there are still gaps in the rapid nutritional risk screening methods for cancer patients. We aimed to evaluate the value of abridged scored patient-generated subjective global assessment (abPG-SGA) for nutritional risk screening and prognosis in cancer patients. The NRS 2002 and abPG-SGA scores of 100 malignant tumor patients hospitalized in our department in December 2020 were collected. Take NRS2002 ≥ 3 as the positive standard (risk of malnutrition). Data were analyzed using Kappa test, ROC curves, cut-off values and Kaplan–Meier. In the screening of 100 patients, 25.0% of patients were at risk of malnutrition (NRS2002), abPG-SGA yielded a sensitivity and specificity of 92.0% and 72.0%, respectively (area under curve [AUC] = 0.884, cut-off value ≥ 4.5); In the screening of patients with digestive system malignancies, 22.6% of patients were at risk of malnutrition (NRS2002), and the sensitivity and specificity of abPG-SGA were 91.67% and 87.80%, respectively (AUC = 0.945, cut-off value ≥ 5.5). The results of survival analysis showed that the overall survival (OS) of patients with abPG-SGA ≥ 5 and < 5, NRS2002 ≥ 3 and abPG-SGA < 5, NRS2002 < 3 and abPG-SGA ≥ 5 were significantly different (P < .0001), the OS of patients with NRS2002 ≥ 3 and abPG-SGA ≥ 5, NRS2002 < 3 and abPG-SGA < 5 were not significantly different (P > .05). Like NRS2002, abPG-SGA can also be used for malnutrition screening and prognosis judgment in cancer patients. It can quickly screen out cancer patients who may be at risk of malnutrition and facilitate the development of nutritional assessments.

show abstract

“…Nutritional interventions during radiotherapy in patients with cancer are beneficial in improving the serum nutritional indicators and reducing the toxic effects of chemoradiotherapy, which is consistent with the results of a previous systematic evaluation. [ 38 ] Related studies have shown that BMI, hemoglobin, total protein, albumin, and prealbumin are important indicators for evaluating malnutrition [ 39 ] ; and that changes in BMI are significant during synchronous radiotherapy in patients with cancer; that improving and maintaining body weight is an important requisite for ensuring efficacy; and that BMI is also an independent prognostic factor for survival in NPC. [ 40 , 41 ] The current study showed no significant difference in the change in BMI before and after the nutritional intervention during chemoradiotherapy, which is consistent with the findings of Bullock study, [ 34 ] wherein the author indicated no correlation between BMI and patient prognosis, a result that needs to be validated by expanding the sample size.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nutritional intervention for the prognosis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma chemoradiotherapy patients: A meta-analysis

He,

Chen,

Yang

et al. 2023

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: To conduct a meta-analysis to investigate the effects of different nutritional interventions on various serum nutritional indicators and patients’ prognosis during radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma, to assess treatment safety and efficacy. Methods: A systematic literature search, mainly randomized controlled trials (RCTs), on the effects of nutritional support on patients undergoing radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma was conducted between January 2010 and August 2022 using databases such as China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Rob2 scale. The meta-analysis was performed using Stata 17.0 software, and the heterogeneity between studies was assessed using the I2 test, and funnel plots were used to qualitatively assess publication bias. Results: Overall, 10 RCTs with a total sample size of 879 cases were identified. The meta-analysis results showed that body mass index (BMI) (odds ratio = 0.026, 95% confidence interval[1]: −0.348 to 0.401, P > .05), albumin (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.13, 95% CI: −0.127 to 0.387, P > .05), and total protein levels were not significantly different between the nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) radiotherapy group with nutritional support group (SMD = −0.262, 95% CI: −1.062 to 0.537, P > .05) and the control group; pre-albumin (SMD = 0.256, 95% CI: 0.022–0.491, P = .032), hemoglobin (SMD = 0.436, 95% CI: 0.26–0.612, P < .000), and lymphocyte count (SMD = 1.125, 95% CI: 0.868–1.381, P < .000) were significantly higher in the nutritional intervention group than in the control group. Conclusion: Compared with conventional diets, nutritional interventions can improve serum nutritional parameters, nutritional status, treatment tolerance, and prognosis of patients undergoing radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

show abstract

Evaluation of malnutrition risk of inpatients in a research and training hospital: A cross-sectional study

Cited by 7 publications

References 31 publications

Dietary assessment methods for measurement of oral intake in acute care and critically ill hospitalised patients: a scoping review

Dietary assessment methods for measurement of oral intake in acute care and critically ill hospitalised patients: a scoping review

The value of abPG-SGA in the nutritional risk screening of patients with malignant tumors

Nutritional intervention for the prognosis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma chemoradiotherapy patients: A meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About