Comparison of the Efficacy of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition Criteria, Subjective Global Assessment, and Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 in Diagnosing Malnutrition and Predicting 5‐Year Mortality in Patients Hospitalized for Acute Illnesses

Objective: The prevalence of malnutrition remains high in older hospitalized patients. Subjective Global Assessment, the Nutrition Risk Screening-2002, and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool are widely used screening and assessment tools, but comparison of their efficacy in predicting clinical outcomes like length of hospital stay remain scarce. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of these tools in predicting length of hospital stay in a group of older hospitalized patients. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed in a sample of 72 patients consecutively admitted to a geriatric medicine ward. Subjective Global Assessment, Nutrition Risk Screening-2002 and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool were performed within 24 hours of admission. Patients were classified as having prolonged length of hospital stay if they stay in the hospital for more than ten days. The association of baseline malnutrition defined by each tool and the prolonged length of hospital stay was assessed using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models. Results: The mean age of the patients was 73.5 ± 6.9 years, and 61.1% were women. The prevalence of malnutrition was 45.8% with Subjective Global Assessment, 51.4% with Nutrition Risk Screening-2002, and 33.3% with Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool. Among the entire cohort, twenty-nine patients (40.2%) had longer length of the hospital stay. After adjusted for covariates, multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the Subjective Global Assessment had the best predictive power (OR: 3.9; p: 0.02), followed by Nutrition Risk Screening-2002 (OR: 3.8; p: 0.03), and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (OR: 2.9; p: 0.02). Conclusion: Malnutrition assessed by the Subjective Global Assessment, Nutrition Risk Screening-2002 and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool on admission predict prolonged length of hospital stay in hospitalized older patients.

Download Full-text

Comparison of Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 and Subjective Global Assessment Form as Short Nutrition Assessment Tools in Older Hospitalized Adults

Nutrients ◽

10.3390/nu13010225 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 13 (1) ◽

pp. 225

Author(s):

Łukasz Kroc ◽

Elizaveta Fife ◽

Edyta Piechocka-Wochniak ◽

Bartłomiej Sołtysik ◽

Tomasz Kostka

Keyword(s):

Global Assessment ◽

Geriatric Depression Scale ◽

Depression Scale ◽

Nutrition Assessment ◽

Assessment Tools ◽

Subjective Global Assessment ◽

Risk Screening ◽

Nutrition Risk ◽

Nrs 2002 ◽

Older Subjects

The aim of the present study was to compare two widely recommended short nutrition assessment tools—Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002) and Subjective Global Assessment Form (SGA)—with other Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) measurements. The study included 622 consecutively hospitalized older subjects, aged 81.7 ± 7.8 years. The criteria to participate were the ability to communicate and given consent. Both NRS-2002 and SGA were inversely related to anthropometric measurements, functional assessment tests, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and positively associated with the Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13) score. Results of SGA and NRS-2002 were not related to sex and 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) score. Comparison of well-nourished subjects and patients with suggested problems with nutrition according to NRS-2002 (0–2 vs. 3–7) and SGA (A vs. B + C) gave comparable results. Both nutritional scales at given cut-off points similarly discriminated anthropometric data and other CGA tools in the populations of well-nourished vs. malnourished hospitalized older subjects. In conclusion, we can recommend using both NRS-2002 and SGA to detect malnutrition or risk of malnutrition in a routine clinical practice of the geriatric department ward.

Download Full-text

Nutritional risk in hospitalized patients: impact of nutritional status on serum prealbumin

Revista de Nutrição ◽

10.1590/s1415-52732011000100009 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 24 (1) ◽

pp. 89-98 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Bulent Saka ◽

Gulistan Bahat Ozturk ◽

Sami Uzun ◽

Nilgun Erten ◽

Sema Genc ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Weight Loss ◽

Nutritional Status ◽

Hospital Stay ◽

Predictive Value ◽

Global Assessment ◽

Nutritional Support ◽

Length Of Hospital Stay ◽

Subjective Global Assessment ◽

Risk Screening ◽

Nutrition Risk

OBJECTIVE: Poor recognition and monitoring of nutritional status is the most important cause of malnutrition in hospitalized patients. The aim of this study was to assess the nutritional status of a group of patients and compare the results with their serum prealbumin levels. METHODS: Ninety-seven patients admitted consecutively to the hospital were enrolled in the study. The risk of malnutrition was assessed according to anthropometric data and the Subjective Global Assessment and Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 tools. The nutritional statuses of the patients were compared with their age, gender, body mass index, medical history, weight loss and routine biochemical analyses, including prealbumin and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: According to the Nutrition Risk Screening 2002, 57% of the patients were malnourished or at risk of malnutrition, correlating well with the Subjective Global Assessment (p<0.001, r=0.700). Multivariate analysis revealed positive correlations between malnutrition and age, weight loss, malignancy and serum C-reative protein (p=0.046, p=0.001, p=0.04 and p=0.002). Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 score ³3 was associated with prolonged length of hospital stay (p=0.001). Serum prealbumin correlated with nutritional status, regardless of the number of chronic diseases and inflammation biomarkers (p=0.01). Serum prealbumin sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic value in the assessment of risk of malnutrition were 94%, 32%, 0.67, 0.78 and 69 respectively. After 7 days of nutritional support, the risk of malnutrition decreased by 12% (p<0.001) and serum prealbumin levels increased by 20% (p=0.003). CONCLUSION: Instead of reflecting overall nutritional status, low serum prealbumin may be regarded as a sign of increased risk of malnutrition, requiring further nutritional assessment. It can be used for monitoring patients receiving nutritional support.

Download Full-text