Development and Validation of Self-screening Tool for Nutrition Risk in Patients With Gastric Cancer After Gastrectomy: A STUDY PROTOCOL

Abstract Background: The incidence of malnutrition in patients with gastric cancer after surgery is 59%. The main reason for the high incidence of malnutrition is untimely nutrition screening and low compliance with nutrition treatment. In order to enable home patients to know their nutritional status in time, we have developed and validated nutritional risk screening tools for patients with gastric cancer to help patients’ at home find nutritional risks in time and seek medical help. This article introduces the development and verification methods and statistical methods of the tool.Methods: The development of self-nutrition risk screening tool for patients with gastric cancer after gastrectomy (SNRSGC) is divided into four parts：Steps1Identification of a potential referred nutritional risk screening; Steps2Item generation and scoring are selected through literature review methods to screen sensitive indicators that can reflect the nutritional characteristics of patients after gastric cancer surgery, establish the frame and update according to the latest guidelines ；Steps3Item reduction is determined by the rating of SNRSGC items by an expert panel and piloting method to determine the final item; Steps4 In the validation stage, we conducted research design based on the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments checklist to evaluate the content validity, structure validity, interpretability, and retest validity of SNRSGC.Discussion: SNRSGC is the first screening tool specifically to predict nutrition risk for stay-at-home postoperative patients with gastric cancer.SNRSGC may provide action guidelines and knowledge guidance for patients with gastric cancer at home.Trial registration: Identifier on Chinese Clinical Trials Registry : ChiCTR2100041809 , registered January 06, 2021.

Download Full-text

Feasibility of using the “modified NUTrition Risk In the Critically ill” nutritional risk screening tool to identify nutritionally at-risk patients in an Australian intensive care unit

Australian Critical Care ◽

10.1016/j.aucc.2019.08.003 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 33 (3) ◽

pp. 259-263 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Sean Kenworthy ◽

Ekta Agarwal ◽

Lisa Farlow ◽

Rebecca Angus ◽

Andrea P. Marshall

Keyword(s):

Intensive Care Unit ◽

At Risk ◽

Intensive Care ◽

Critically Ill ◽

Screening Tool ◽

Nutritional Risk ◽

Risk Screening ◽

Nutrition Risk ◽

Risk Patients ◽

Nutritional Risk Screening

Download Full-text

New screening tool for neonatal nutritional risk in China: a validation study

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042467 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (4) ◽

pp. e042467

Author(s):

Mei Zhou ◽

Yuwei Li ◽

Huaying Yin ◽

Xianhong Zhang ◽

Yan Hu

Keyword(s):

Validation Study ◽

Head Circumference ◽

Predictive Value ◽

Screening Tool ◽

Nutritional Risk ◽

Risk Level ◽

Spearman Correlation ◽

Nutrition Risk ◽

Sensitivity Specificity ◽

Nutritional Risk Screening

ObjectiveA neonatal nutritional risk screening tool (NNRST) was developed by using Delphi and analytic hierarchy processes in China. We verified the accuracy of this tool and analysed whether it effectively screened neonates with nutritional risk.DesignProspective validation study.Setting and participantsIn total, 338 neonates who were admitted to the neonatal unit of Children’s Hospital of Chongqing Medical University from May–July 2016 completed the study. Nutritional risk screening and length and head circumference measurements were performed weekly. Weight was measured every morning, and other relevant clinical data were recorded during hospitalisation.Main outcome measuresWe evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, validity, reliability, and positive and negative predictive value of the screening tool. Various characteristics of neonates in different risk groups were analysed to determine the rationality of the nutritional risk classification.ResultsThe sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were 85.11%, 91.07%, 60.61% and 97.43%, respectively. The criterion validity was texted by the Spearman correlation analysis (r=0.530) and independent samples non-parametric tests (p=0.000). The content validity (Spearman correlation coefficient) was 0.321–0.735. The inter-rater reliability (kappa value) was 0.890. Among the neonatal clinical indicators, gestational age, birth weight, length, admission head circumference, admission albumin, admission total proteins, discharge weight, discharge length and head circumference decreased with increasing nutrition risk level; the length of stay and the rate of parenteral nutrition support increased with increasing nutrition risk level. In the comparison of complications during hospitalisation, the incidence of necrotising enterocolitis and congenital gastrointestinal malformation increased with increasing nutrition risk level.ConclusionThe validation results for the NNRST are reliable. The tool can be used to preliminarily determine the degree of neonatal nutritional risk, but its predictive value needs to be determined in future large-sample studies.Trial registration numberChiCTR2000033743.

Download Full-text