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.

Association of GDF15 With Inflammation and Physical Function During Aging and Recovery After Acute Hospitalization: A Longitudinal Study of Older Patients and Age-Matched Controls

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliette Tavenier ◽  
Line Jee Hartmann Rasmussen ◽  
Aino Leegaard Andersen ◽  
Morten Baltzer Houlind ◽  
Anne Langkilde ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nutritional Status ◽  
Physical Function ◽  
Plasma Levels ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Nutritional Assessment ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Mini Nutritional Assessment ◽  
Acute Illness ◽  
Urokinase Plasminogen Activator Receptor

Abstract Growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF15) is a stress-induced cytokine. Its plasma levels increase during aging and acute illness. In older Patients and age-matched Controls, we evaluated whether GDF15 levels (i) were associated with recovery after acute illness, and (ii) reflected different trajectories of aging and longitudinal changes in health measures. Fifty-two older Patients (≥65 years) were included upon admission to the emergency department (ED). At 30 days after discharge (time of matching), Patients were matched 1:1 on age and sex with Controls who had not been hospitalized within 2 years of inclusion. Both groups were followed up after 1 year. We assessed plasma levels of GDF15 and inflammatory biomarkers, frailty, nutritional status (mini nutritional assessment short-form), physical and cognitive function, and metabolic biomarkers. In Patients, elevated GDF15 levels at ED admission were associated with poorer resolution of inflammation (soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor [suPAR]), slowing of gait speed, and declining nutritional status between admission and 30-day follow-up. At time of matching, Patients were frailer and overall less healthy than age-matched Controls. GDF15 levels were significantly associated with participant group, on average Patients had almost 60% higher GDF15 than age-matched Controls, and this difference was partly mediated by reduced physical function. Increases in GDF15 levels between time of matching and 1-year follow-up were associated with increases in levels of interleukin-6 in Patients, and tumor necrosis factor-α and suPAR in age-matched Controls. In older adults, elevated GDF15 levels were associated with signs of accelerated aging and with poorer recovery after acute illness.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document