ABSTRACT
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence of malnutrition in hospitalised adult patients, and to evaluate the accuracy of the most commonly used nutritional screening tools for identifying individuals at risk of malnutrition. METHODS: A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted on a total of 248 hospitalised patients in internal medicine wards (mean age: 75.2 years; 39.5% females). Nutritional screening was performed within 48 h of admission using the following tools: Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), Nutrition Risk Screening Tool (NRS-2002), Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST), Short Nutritional Assessment Questionnaire (SNAQ), and Mini Nutritional Assessment Short Form (MNA-SF). The criteria of the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) were used as the gold standard for defining malnutrition. Patients were also evaluated using the Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) and the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria. Accuracy was determined by examining sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values, and diagnostic agreement was determined by calculation of Cohen's kappa (κ). The study is reported as per the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines. RESULTS: The ESPEN criteria classified 20.2% of the hospitalised patients as malnourished. Overall, the MUST had the highest sensitivity (80.0%), specificity (74.7%) and positive predictive value (44.4%). For the subgroup of patients aged >65 years, the MNA-SF had high sensitivity (94.4%) but low specificity (39.0%). Based on Cohen's κ, the SGA and GLIM criteria showed low agreement with the ESPEN criteria. CONCLUSION: The MUST was the most accurate nutritional screening tool, through the MST is more easily applied in many clinical settings. A comprehensive assessment of malnutrition that considers muscle mass is crucial for the reliable diagnosis of malnutrition. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: The present findings underscore the importance of accurate assessment of the malnutrition status of hospitalised patients and the need for a reliable screening tool. No patient or public contribution.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is a clinical problem with a high prevalence in hospitalized adult patients. Many nutritional screening tools have been developed but there is no consensus on which 1 is more useful. The purpose of this review protocol is to provide an overview of which nutritional screening tool is most valid to identify malnutritional risk in hospitalized adult patients and to analyze the sensitivity and specificity of the different tools. METHODS: The protocol of this systematic review and meta-analysis was registered on the INPLASY website (https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2020-9-0028/) and INPLASY registration number is INPLASY202090028. We will perform a systematic literature search of main databases: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science and the Cochrane database. Also, grey literature will be search. Peer-reviewed studies published in English, Portuguese or Spanish language will be selected. Screening of titles, abstract and full text will be assessed for eligibility by 2 independent blinded reviewers and any discrepancies will be resolved via consensus. After screening the studies, a meta-analysis will be conducted, if it is possible. RESULTS: Results from this systematic review will help health professionals to identify malnutrition in hospitalized patients and to make decisions to prevent or treat it as well as provide new clues to researchers. CONCLUSION: Our systematic review will provide aknowledge about the most valid malnutrition risk screening tool in hospitalized adult patients.
