Journal of Nutrition and Health

The Korean Nutrition Society (한국영양학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Validation of the Developed Nutritional Screening Tool for Hospital Patients

입원환자를 위해 개발된 영양검색 도구의 타당성 검증

  • Lee, Jeong-Sook (Nutrition Health Management Center, Kyunghee University East-West Neo Medical Center) ;
  • Cho, Mi-Ran (Nutrition Health Management Center, Kyunghee University East-West Neo Medical Center) ;
  • Lee, Geum-Ju (Nutrition Health Management Center, Kyunghee University East-West Neo Medical Center)
  • 이정숙 (경희대학교 동서신의학병원 영양건강관리센터) ;
  • 조미란 (경희대학교 동서신의학병원 영양건강관리센터) ;
  • 이금주 (경희대학교 동서신의학병원 영양건강관리센터)
  • Received : 2010.02.05
  • Accepted : 2010.02.24
  • Published : 2010.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Malnutrition has been associated with higher hospital costs, mortality, rates of complications and longer length of hospital stay. Several nutritional screening tools have been developed to identify patients with malnutrition risk. However, many of those require much time and labor to administer and may not be applicable to a Korean population. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop nutritional screening tool for Korean inpatients. Then we compare nutritional screening tools that developed and previously described. Seven hundred sixty-four patients at hospital admission were screened nutritional status and classified as well nourished, malnutrition stage 1 or stage 2 by the KNNRS (Kyunghee Neo Nutrition Risk Screening), PG-SGA (Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment) and NRS-2002 (Nutritional Risk Screening-2002). The KNNRS, PG-SGA and NRS-2002 respectively classified 28.7%, 51.3%, 48.5% of patients as malnourished status. Compared to the PG-SGA, the KNNRS had sensitivity 60.7% (95% CI 54.2-67.0) and specificity 81.2% (95% CI 75.3-85.2). Agreement was fair between KNNRS and PG-SGA (k = 0.34). Compared to the NRS-2002, the KNNRS had sensitivity 57.8% (95% CI 53.4-60.9) and specificity 64.4% (95% CI 60.2-69.8). Agreement was poor between KNNRS and NRS-2002 (k = 0.18). These result should include that the KNNRS and PGSGA have clinical relevance and fair concordance. However the rate of malnourished patients by KNNRS were less than by PG-SGA. For more effectivity of nutritional screening and management, the criteria of KNNRS would be better revised.

입원환자의 초기 영양관리를 위해 개발한 영양검색 도구의 타당성을 평가 하고자 입원 후 48시간 이내에 동일한 대상자에게 KNNRS, PG-SGA, NRS-2002를 수행하였으며 그 결과를 비교 평가하였다. 1) KNNRS, PG-SGA, NRS-2002를 이용한 영양검색결과 영양상태 불량 및 영양불량 위험도가 높은 환자의 비율은 각각 28.7%, 51.3%, 48.5%로 나타났다. 2) 각 영양검색 도구에 따라 영양상태 불량 및 영양불량 위험도가 높은 것으로 나타난 환자는 영양상태 양호 및 영양불량 위험도가 낮은 환자에 비해 공통적으로 평균연령이 높고 BMI, 혈중 헤모글로빈, 총 임파구수, 알부민 수치가 유의적으로 낮았다. 3) KNNRS와 PG-SGA에 의한 영양상태 분류를 비교하였을 때 KNNRS에서 영양상태가 양호한 환자 545명 중 PG-SGA에 의해 영양상태가 양호한 환자는 331명이었다. KNNRS에서 영양상태가 불량한 환자 219명 중 PG-SGA에서도 영양상태가 불량한 환자는 178명이었다. 민감도와 특이도는 각각 60.7% (95%CI 54.2-67.0), 81.2% (95% CI 75.3-85.2)로 영양불량 상태를 판정하는데 두 도구가 임상적 관련성이 있는 것으로 사료된다. 두 도구 간 유사성 kappa 지수는 0.34로 KNNRS는 PG-SGA를 기준으로 타당한 검색도구로 검증되었다. 4) KNNRS와 NRS-2002에 의한 영양상태 분류를 비교하였을 때 KNNRS에서 영양상태가 양호한 환자 540명 중 NRS-2002에 의해 영양불량 위험도가 낮은 환자는 312명 이었다. KNNRS에서 영양상태가 불량한 환자 216명 중 NRS-2002에서 영양불량 위험도가 높은 환자는 139명이었다. 민감도와 특이도는 각각 57.8% (95%CI 53.4-60.9), 64.4% (95%CI 60.2-69.8)로 영양불량 상태를 판정하는 데 두 도구가 임상적 관련성이 적은 것으로 사료된다. 두 도구 간 유사성은 kappa 지수 0.18로 낮게 나타났다. 5) KNNRS가 PG-SGA 결과와 비교 시 타당성이 검증되었으나 영양불량환자의 비율은 28.7%로 PG-SGA와 NRS-2002의 51.3%, 48.5%에 비해 낮았다. 보다 효과적이고 적극적인 초기 영양관리 중재를 위하여 영양불량 판정 기준의 수정 보완이 필요하다. 6) 영양검색 도구의 유효성과 영양관리의 효과를 검증하기 위하여 재원일수, 합병증 여부, 질병 예후, 사망여부와의 연계연구가 필요하다.

Keywords

References

  1. Edington J, Boorman J, Durrant E, et al. Prevalence of malnutrition on admission to four hospitals in England. The Malnutrition Prevalence Group. Clin Nutr 2000; 19: 191-195 https://doi.org/10.1054/clnu.1999.0121
  2. Bruun LI, Bosaeus I, Bergstad I, Nygaard K. Prevalence of malnutrition in surgical patients: evaluation of nutritional support and documentation. Clin Nutr 1999; 18: 141-147 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5614(99)80003-X
  3. Waitzberg DL, Caiaffa WT, Correia MI. Hospital malnutrition: the Brazilian national survey (IBRANUTRI): a study of 4000 patients. Nutrition 2001; 17: 573 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-9007(01)00573-1
  4. Correia MI, Waitzberg DL. The impact of malnutrition on morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay and costs evaluated through a multivariate model analysis. Clin Nutr 2003; 22: 235-239 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5614(02)00215-7
  5. Schneider SM, Veyres P, Pivot X, Soummer AM, Jambou P, Filippi J. van Obberghen E, Hébuterne X. Malnutrition is an independent factor associated with nosocomial infections. Br J Nutr 2004; 92: 105-111 https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN20041152
  6. Kylea UG, Kossovskyb MP, Karsegarda VL, Picharda C. Comparison of tools for nutritional assessment and screening at hospital admission: A population study. Clin Nutr 2006; 25: 409-417 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2005.11.001
  7. Brugler L, Stankovic AK, Schlefer M, Bernstein L. A simplified nutrition screen for hospitalized patients using readily available laboratory and patient information. Nutrition 2005; 21(6): 650-658 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nut.2004.10.012
  8. Ministry for health, welfare and family affairs. 2009 Guidelines for hospital evaluation program; 2009
  9. Detsky AS, McLaughin JR, Baker JP, Johnston N, Whittalcer S, Mendelson RA, Jeejeebhoy KN. What is subjective global assessment of nutritional status? J Parent Enteral Nutr 1987; 11: 8-13 https://doi.org/10.1177/014860718701100108
  10. Kondrup J, Allison SP, Elia M, Vellas B, Plauth M. ESPEN guidelines for nutrition screening 2002. Clin Nutr 2003; 22: 415-421 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5614(03)00098-0
  11. Kruizenga HM, Seidell JC, de Vet HC, Wierdsam NJ, van Bokhorst- devan der Schueren MA. Development and validation of a hospital screening tool for malnutrition: the short nutritional assessment questionnaire (SNAQ). Clin Nutr 2005; 24(1): 75-82 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2004.07.015
  12. Guigoz Y, Vellas BJ. Malnutrition in the elderly: the mini nutritional assessment (MNA). Ther Umsch 1997; 54: 345-350
  13. Ruiz-Lopez MD, Artacho R, Oliva P, Moreno-Torres R, Bolanos J, de Teresa C, Lopez MC. Nutritional risk in institutionalized older women determined by the Mini Nutritional Assessment test: What are the main factors? Nutrition 2003; 19(9): 767-771 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-9007(03)00125-4
  14. Bauer J, Capra S, Ferguson M. Use of the scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) as a nutrition assessment tool in patients with cancer. Eur J Clin Nutr 2002; 56 (8): 779-785 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601412
  15. Kovacevich DS, Boney AR, Braunschweig CL, Perez A, Stevens M. Nutritional risk classification: a reproducble and valid tool for nurse. Nutr Clin Pract 1997; 12: 20-25 https://doi.org/10.1177/011542659701200120
  16. Kruizenga HM, Van Tulder MW, Seidell JC, Thijs A, Ader HJ, Van Bokhorst-de van der Schueren MA. Effectiveness and costeffectiveness of early screening and treatment of malnourished patients. Am J Clin Nutr 2005; 82: 1082-1089
  17. Pham NV, Cox-Reijven PL, Greve JW, Soeters PB. Application of subjective global assessment as a screening tool for malnutrition in surgical patients in Vietnam. Clin Nutr 2006: 25; 102-108 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2005.09.002
  18. Akpele L, Bailey JL. Nutrition counseling impacts serum albumin levels. J Ren Nutr 2004: 14(3); 143-148 https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jrn.2004.04.003
  19. Dzieniszewski J, Jarosz M, Szczygiel B, Dlugosz J, Marlicz K, Linke K, Lachowicz A, Ryzko-Skiba M, Orzeszko M. Nutritional status of patients hospitalised in Poland. Eur J Clin Nutr 2005: 59 (4); 552-556 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602117
  20. Putwatana P, Reodecha P, Sirapo-ngam Y, Lertsithichai P, Sumboonnanonda K. Nutrition screening tools and the prediction of postoperative infectious and wound complications: comparison of methods in presence of risk adjustment. Nutrition 2005: 21 (6); 691-697 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nut.2004.10.015
  21. Pablo AM, Izaga MA, Alday LA. Assessment of nutritional status on hospital admission: nutritional scores. Eur J Clin Nutr 2003; 57: 824-831 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601616
  22. Pirlich M, Lochs H. Nutrition in the elderly. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2001; 15: 869-884 https://doi.org/10.1053/bega.2001.0246
  23. Stratton RJ, Hackston A, Longmore D, et al. Malnutrition in hospital outpatients and inpatients: prevalence, concurrent validity and ease of use of the 'malnutrition universal screening tool' ('MUST') for adults. Br J Nutr 2004; 92(5): 799-808 https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN20041258
  24. L.M.W. van Venrooij, R. de Vos, A.M.M.J. Borgmeijer-Hoelen, H.M. Kruizenga, C.F. Jonkers-Schuitema, B.A.M.J. de Mol. Quick-and-easy nutritional screening tools to detect disease-related undernutrition in hospital in- and outpatient settings: A systematic review of sensitivity and specificity. Eur e-J Clin Nutr Metabol 2007: 2; 21-37 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclnm.2007.03.001
  25. Kim SA, Kim SY, Sohn CM. Development of Nutrition Screening Index for Hospitalized Patients. Korean J Community Nutr 2006: 11(6); 779-784
  26. Han JS, Lee SM, Chung HK, Ahn HS, Lee SM. Development and Evaluation of a Nutritional Risk Screening Tool (NRST) for Hospitalized Patients. Korean J Nutr 2009; 42(2): 119-127 https://doi.org/10.4163/kjn.2009.42.2.119

Cited by

  1. Factors Associated with Early Nutritional Status after Radical Gastrectomy in Patients with Gastric Cancer vol.15, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.5388/aon.2015.15.4.219
  2. Comparison of Nursing Records and the Catholic Medical Center Nutritional Risk Screening as a Nutrition Screening Tool for Intensive Care Unit Patients vol.4, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.7762/cnr.2015.4.1.56
  3. Evaluation of the efficacy of nutritional screening tools to predict malnutrition in the elderly at a geriatric care hospital vol.9, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.4162/nrp.2015.9.6.637
  4. Development of a simplified malnutrition screening tool for hospitalized patients and evaluation of its inter-methods reliability vol.47, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.4163/jnh.2014.47.2.124
  5. Identifying Latent Classes of Risk Factors for Coronary Artery Disease vol.47, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2017.47.6.817
  6. Nutrition and Clinical Outcomes of Nutrition Support in Multidisciplinary Team for Critically Ill Patients vol.33, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/ncp.10093
  7. 일부 농촌 지역에서 회합 급식을 하는 여자 노인의 우울 정도, 신체계측 및 영양섭취실태 조사 vol.28, pp.4, 2010, https://doi.org/10.9799/ksfan.2015.28.4.517
  8. 입원 환자용 초기 영양검색도구의 타당도 검증 vol.52, pp.4, 2010, https://doi.org/10.4163/jnh.2019.52.4.332
  9. 전이암 환자에서 단일기관 영양검색 도구의 예후 가치 vol.24, pp.2, 2019, https://doi.org/10.15432/jkto.2019.24.2.001