Simplifier le dépistage de la dénutrition du sujet âgé en médecine générale : test de concordance entre un outil simple, le « Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool » (« MUST ») et le « Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form » (« MNA-SF »)

2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 109-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laury Kézachian ◽  
Pierre-André Bonnet
Keyword(s):  
Universal Screening ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Nutritional Assessment ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Mini Nutritional Assessment ◽  
Sujet Âgé ◽  
Médecine Générale ◽  
Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool

scholarly journals A Comparison of the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) and the Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form (MNA-SF) Tool for Older Patients Undergoing General Surgery

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (24) ◽  
pp. 5860
Author(s):  
Stamatios Kokkinakis ◽  
Maria Venianaki ◽  
Georgia Petra ◽  
Alexandros Chrysos ◽  
Emmanuel Chrysos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Surgery ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Universal Screening ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Nutritional Assessment ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Mini Nutritional Assessment ◽  
Postoperative Outcomes ◽  
Postoperative Length ◽  
Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool

The optimal malnutrition screening tool in geriatric surgery has yet to be determined. Herein, we compare two main tools in older patients undergoing general surgery operations. Older patients (>65 years old) who underwent general surgery operations between 2012 and 2017 in a tertiary centre were included. The Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) and the Mini Nutritional Assessment Short Form (MNA-SF) were used for nutritional risk assessment. Preoperative variables as well as postoperative outcomes were recorded prospectively. Agreement between tools was determined with the weighted kappa (κ) statistic. Multiple regression analysis was used to assess the association of the screening tools with postoperative outcomes. A total of 302 patients (median age 74 years, range: 65–92) were included. A similar number of patients were classified as medium/high risk for malnutrition with the MNA-SF and MUST (26% vs. 36%, p = 0.126). Agreement between the two tools was moderate (weighted κ: 0.474; 95%CI: 0.381–0.568). In the multivariate analysis, MNA-SF was associated significantly with postoperative mortality (p = 0.038) and with postoperative length of stay (p = 0.001). MUST was associated with postoperative length of stay (p = 0.048). The MNA-SF seems to be more consistently associated with postoperative outcomes in elderly patients undergoing general surgery compared with the MUST tool.

scholarly journals Malnutrition in hospital outpatients and inpatients: prevalence, concurrent validity and ease of use of the ‘malnutrition universal screening tool’ (‘MUST’) for adults

2004 ◽  
Vol 92 (5) ◽  
pp. 799-808 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca J. Stratton ◽  
Annemarie Hackston ◽  
David Longmore ◽  
Rod Dixon ◽  
Sarah Price ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Excellent Agreement ◽  
Risk Score ◽  
Universal Screening ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Mini Nutritional Assessment ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Medical Inpatients ◽  
Patient Groups ◽  
Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool

The ‘malnutrition universal screening tool’ (‘MUST’) for adults has been developed for all health care settings and patient groups, but ease of use and agreement with other published tools when screening to identify malnutrition requires investigation. The present study assessed the agreement and the prevalence of malnutrition risk between ‘MUST’ and a variety of other tools in the same patients and compared the ease of using these tools. Groups of patients were consecutively screened using ‘MUST’ and: (1) MEREC Bulletin (MEREC) and Hickson and Hill (HH) tools (fifty gastroenterology outpatients); (2) nutrition risk score (NRS) and malnutrition screening tool (MST; seventy-five medical inpatients); (3) short-form mini nutritional assessment (MNA-tool; eighty-six elderly and eighty-five surgical inpatients); (4) subjective global assessment (SGA; fifty medical inpatients); (5) Doyle undernutrition risk score (URS; fifty-two surgical inpatients). Using ‘MUST’, the prevalence of malnutrition risk ranged from 19–60% in inpatients and 30% in outpatients. ‘MUST’ had ‘excellent’ agreement (κ 0.775–0.893) with MEREC, NRS and SGA tools, ‘fair–good’ agreement (κ 0.551–0.711) with HH, MST and MNA-tool tools and ‘poor’ agreement with the URS tool (κ 0.255). When categorisation of malnutrition risk differed between tools, it did not do so systematically, except between ‘MUST’ and MNA-tool (P=0.0005) and URS (P=0.039). ‘MUST’ and MST were the easiest, quickest tools to complete (3–5 min). The present investigation suggested a high prevalence of malnutrition in hospital inpatients and outpatients (19–60% with ‘MUST’) and ‘fair–good’ to ‘excellent’ agreement beyond chance between ‘MUST’ and most other tools studied. ‘MUST’ was quick and easy to use in these patient groups.

An evaluation of the validity of nutrition screening and assessment tools in patients admitted to a vascular surgery unit

2019 ◽  
Vol 122 (6) ◽  
pp. 689-697 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jolene Thomas ◽  
Billingsley Kaambwa ◽  
Christopher Delaney ◽  
Michelle Miller
Keyword(s):  
Vascular Surgery ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Nutritional Assessment ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Mini Nutritional Assessment ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Nrs 2002

AbstractVascular surgery patients are nutritionally vulnerable. Various malnutrition screening and assessment tools are available; however, none has been developed or validated in vascular patients. The present study aimed to: (1) investigate the validity of four commonly administered malnutrition screening tools (Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST), Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), Nutrition Risk Screen-2002 (NRS-2002) and the Mini-Nutritional Assessment – Short Form (MNA-SF) and an assessment tool (the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA)) compared against a comprehensive dietitian’s assessment and (2) evaluate the ability of the instruments to predict outcomes. Vascular inpatients were screened using the four malnutrition screening tools and assessed using the PG-SGA. Each was assessed by a dietitian incorporating nutritional biochemistry, anthropometry and changes in dietary intake. Diagnostic accuracy, consistency and predictive ability were determined. A total of 322 (69·3 % male) patients participated, with 75 % having at least one parameter indicating nutritional deficits. No instrument achieved the a priori levels for sensitivity (14·9–52·5 %). Neither tool predicted EuroQoL 5-dimension 5-level score. All tools except the MNA-SF were associated with length of stay (LOS); however, the direction varied with increased risk of malnutrition on the MUST and NRS-2002 being associated with shorter LOS (P=0·029 and 0·045) and the reverse with the MST and PG-SGA (P=0·005 and <0·001). The NRS-2002 was associated with increased risk of complications (P=0·039). The MST, NRS-2002 and PG-SGA were predictive of discharge to an institution (P=0·004, 0·005 and 0·003). The tools studied were unable to identify the high prevalence of undernutrition; hence, vascular disease-specific screening and/or assessment tools are warranted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document