• Nutrition Research and Practice
• /
• v.13 no.5
• /
• pp.410-414
• /
• 2019

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Several nutritional screening tools were recently developed to screen the risk of malnutrition in hospitalized children, but have not been validated in Asia. We compared four nutritional screening tools for pediatric patients in evaluating nutritional risks in newly hospitalized children. SUBJECTS/METHODS: Medical records of newly admitted pediatric patients between June 2016 and May 2017 at two tertiary hospitals were reviewed. Initial information by nurses and hospital records by doctors on baseline demographic, clinical, and anthropometric data at admission were collected in all subjects. Nutritional risks were evaluated using four nutritional screening tools including the pediatric nutritional risk score (PNRS), the screening tool for the assessment of malnutrition in pediatrics (STAMP), the paediatric Yorkhill malnutrition score (PYMS), and the screening tools for risk of nutritional status and growth (STRONGkids). RESULTS: A total of 559 patients (310 boys and 249 girls, mean age $6.3{\pm}5.5years$) were recruited. Patients in medical and surgical departments were 469 (83.9%) and 90 (16.1%), respectively. The prevalence of patients at risk of malnutrition were 31.1% for low risk, 52.2% for medium risk, and 16.6% for high risk by PNRS; 11.4%, 39.7%, and 48.8% by STAMP; 26.5%, 25.4%, and 48.1% by PYMS; and 35.6%, 58.9%, and 5.5% by STRONGkids. PNRS versus STRONGkids and STAMP versus PYMS showed moderate agreement (kappa = 0.566 and kappa = 0.495, respectively). PYMS and STAMP revealed a relatively high sensitivity of 87.8% and 77.6% for wasting. CONCLUSION: Different nutritional screening tools revealed considerably different results in evaluating nutritional risks in newly hospitalized children. Since pediatric patients are at risk of malnutrition at admission and during hospitalization, screening tools should be applied properly according to the situation of each hospital.

• Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Nutrition
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.213-223
• /
• 2023

Purpose: Pediatric patients in low-income countries are at a high risk of malnutrition. Numerous screening tools have been developed to detect the risk of malnutrition, including the Subjective Global Nutritional Assessment (SGNA), Pediatric Yorkhill Malnutrition Score (PYMS), Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition in Pediatrics (STAMP), and Screening Tool for Risk of Nutritional Status and Growth (STRONGkids). However, anthropometry remains the main tool for assessing malnutrition. We aimed to identify the value of four nutritional screening tools versus anthropometry for evaluating the nutritional status of children. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 1,000 children aged 1-12 years who visited the outpatient clinic of Cairo University Pediatric Hospital. Each participant was evaluated using anthropometric measurements (weight, length/height, and weight for length/height) as well as the PYMS, STAMP, STRONGkids, and SGNA screening tools. The sensitivities and specificities of these four tools were assessed using anthropometry as the gold standard. Results: Of the patients, 1.7% were underweight, 10.2% were wasted, and 35% were stunted. STRONGkids demonstrated the highest sensitivity (79.4%) and a high specificity (80.2%) for detecting malnutrition compared with weight for height, followed by STAMP, which demonstrated lower sensitivity (73.5%) but higher specificity (81.4%). PYMS demonstrated the lowest sensitivity (66.7%) and the highest specificity (93.5%), whereas SAGA demonstrated higher sensitivity (77.5%) and lower specificity (85.4%) than PYMS. Conclusion: The use of nutritional screening tools to evaluate the nutritional status of children is valuable and recommended as a simple and rapid method for identifying the risk of malnutrition in pediatric patients.

• Nutrition Research and Practice
• /
• v.9 no.6
• /
• pp.637-643
• /
• 2015

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Malnutrition in the elderly is a serious problem, prevalent in both hospitals and care homes. Due to the absence of a gold standard for malnutrition, herein we evaluate the efficacy of five nutritional screening tools developed or used for the elderly. SUBJECTS/METHODS: Elected medical records of 141 elderly patients (86 men and 55 women, aged $73.5{\pm}5.2years$) hospitalized at a geriatric care hospital were analyzed. Nutritional screening was performed using the following tools: Mini Nutrition Assessment (MNA), Mini Nutrition Assessment-Short Form (MNA-SF), Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI), Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) and Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002). A combined index for malnutrition was also calculated as a reference tool. Each patient evaluated as malnourished to any degree or at risk of malnutrition according to at least four out of five of the aforementioned tools was categorized as malnourished in the combined index classification. RESULTS: According to the combined index, 44.0% of the patients were at risk of malnutrition to some degree. While the nutritional risk and/or malnutrition varied greatly depending on the tool applied, ranging from 36.2% (MUST) to 72.3% (MNA-SF). MUST showed good validity (sensitivity 80.6%, specificity 98.7%) and almost perfect agreement (k = 0.81) with the combined index. In contrast, MNA-SF showed poor validity (sensitivity 100%, specificity 49.4%) and only moderate agreement (k = 0.46) with the combined index. CONCLUSIONS: MNA-SF was found to overestimate the nutritional risk in the elderly. MUST appeared to be the most valid and useful screening tool to predict malnutrition in the elderly at a geriatric care hospital.

• Journal of Nutrition and Health
• /
• v.33 no.8
• /
• pp.864-872
• /
• 2000

This study intended to evaluate the validity of the simple nutrition screening test that had been developed with the elderly living in Cheongju as a subject. Nutrition screening score(NSS) and reference standards for nutritional and health status(nutrient intakes, mean adequacy ratio, perceive health, and serum albumin, hematocrit, and hemoglobin) were estimated by using the date obtained in 1996 from the 174 elderly living in Taejon, Statistical analysis showed significant correlations between mean adequacy ratio(MAR) and NSS(r=0.341) and also between NSS and biological indices such as albumin and hematocrit, Around 65-75% of the elderly with perceive health and low level of serum albumin, hemoglobin and hematocrit had NSS$\leq$ll. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive values(PPV) were calculated from the crosstabulation of the three categories of NSS(high, moderate, and low nutritional risk) and low categories MAR(< 0.75, undernutrition;$\geq$0.75, normal) to validate the cut-off point for high or low nutritional risk by NSS. It was suggested that point l1 was appropriate as a criterion to determine high risk of undernutrition, but point 16 was better than 17 as criterion to determine low nutritional risk in the Taejon elderly. When point ll was used as a criterion of high nutritional risk, sensitivity, specificity, and PPV are 59.5, 60.5 and 82.1 respectively. When point 16 was used as a criterion of low nutritional risk, sensitivity, specificity, and PPV are 25.6, 95.4, and 64.7%, respectively. In conclusion, nutrition screening test that had been developed can be a simple, easy, and proper instrument to classify the high risk group of undernutrition. A further validation study seems to be required among other groups of individuals for the screening test to the finalized as a more valid instrument identifying Korean elderly at nutrition and health risk(Korean J Nutrition 33(8) : 864-872, 2000)

• Nutrition Research and Practice
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.20-24
• /
• 2020

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Malnutrition has multiple impacts on surgical success, postoperative complications, duration of hospital stay, and costs, particularly for cancer patients. There are various nutrition risk screening tools available for clinical use. Herein, we aim to determine the most appropriate nutritional risk screening system for esophageal cancer (EC) patients in China. SUBJECTS/METHODS: In total, 138 EC patients were enrolled in this study and evaluated by experienced nurses using three different nutritional screening tools, the Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 tool (NRS2002), the Patient-generated Subjective Globe Assessment (PG-SGA), and the Nutrition Risk Index (NRI).We compared sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and Youden index generated by each of the three screening tools. Finally, cut-off points for all three tools were re-defined to optimize and validate the best nutritional risk screening tool for assessing EC patients. RESULTS: Our data suggested that all three screening tools were 100% sensitive for EC patients, while the specificities were 44.4%, 2.96%, and 59.26% for NRS 2002, PG-SGA, and NRI, respectively. NRI had a higher positive likelihood ratio as well as a higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve compared to those of NRS 2002 and PG-SGA; although, all three tools had null negative likelihood ratios. After adjusting the cut-off points, the specificity and accuracy for all tools were significantly improved, however, the NRI remained the most appropriate nutritional risk screening system for EC patients. CONCLUSIONS: The NRI is the most suitable (highest sensitivity and accuracy) nutritional risk screening tool for EC patients. The performance of the NRI can be significantly improved if the cut-off point is modified according to the results obtained using MedCalc software.

• Journal of the Korean Dietetic Association
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.48-53
• /
• 1999

This study was prospectively conducted to investigate any relationship of nutritional status at the time of admission to length of hospital stay and mortality. All patients admitted to the Asan Medical Center between October 13 and November 12, 1997 who met the study criteria were included in the study. Patients were classified as Not-at-risk, At-risk Ⅰ or At-risk Ⅱ based on the levels of serum albumin and total lymphocyte count in a computerized nutrition screening program. Sixty three percent of the patients were classified as Not-at-risk Group, 29% as At-risk Group Ⅰ and 8% as At-risk Group Ⅱ. Significant correlation was observed between nutritional status and LOS (P＜0.01) as well as mortality rate (P＜0.05). The more the patient had the nutritional risk factors, the longer the LOS and the higher the mortality rate were. Further studies have to be done in order to demonstrate cost-effectiveness of medical therapy for the malnourished hospitalized patients.

• Korean Journal of Community Nutrition
• /
• v.11 no.6
• /
• pp.779-784
• /
• 2006

Several studies about hospital malnutrition have been reported that about more than 40% of hospitalized patients are having nutritional risk factors and hospital malnutrition presents a high prevalence. People in a more severe nutritional status ended up with a longer length of hospital stay and higher hospital cost. Nutrition screening tools identify individuals who are malnourished or at risk of becoming malnourished and who may benefit from nutritional support. For the early detection and treatment of malnourished hospital patients , few valid screening instruments fur Koreans exist. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop a simple, reliable and valid malnutrition screening tool that could be used at hospital admission to identify adult patients at risk of malnutrition using medical electrical record data. Two hundred and one patients of the university affiliated medical center were assessed on nutritional status and classified as well nourished, moderately or severely malnourished by a Patient-Generated subjective global assessment (PG-SGA) being chosen as the 'gold standard' for defining malnutrition. The combination of nutrition screening questions with the highest sensitivity and specificity at prediction PG-SGA was termed the nutrition screening index (NSI). Odd ratio, and binary logistic regression were used to predict the best nutritional status predictors. Based on regression coefficient score, albumin less than 3.5 g/dl, body mass index (BMI) less than $18.5kg/m^2$, total lymphocyte count less than 900 and age over 65 were determined as the best set of NSI. By using best nutritional predictors receiver operating characteristic curve with the area under the curve, sensitivity and 1-specificity were analyzed to determine the best optimal cut-off point to decide normal or abnormal in nutritional status. Therefore simple and beneficial NSI was developed for identifying patients with severe malnutrition. Using NSI, nutritional information of the severe malnutrition patient should be shared with physicians and they should be cared for by clinical dietitians to improve their nutritional status.

• Journal of Korean Traditional Oncology
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.1-11
• /
• 2019

Objectives : We investigated whether a single center nutrition screening tool (Kyunghee Neo Nutrition Risk Screening, KNNRS) can predict survival in patients with metastatic cancer. Methods : We retrospectively reviewed data of inpatients with metastatic cancer from April 2016 to August 2019. Data on demographic and clinical parameters were collected from electronic medical records, and overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Stepwise Cox regression analysis was used to determine factors associated with survival. Patients with a KNNRS score of 0 to 3 were classified as "no-risk", 4 to 10 as "low-risk", and 11 to 20 as "high-risk". Results : Total 105 patients were included in the study. According to nutritional screening at baseline, 25 patients (23.8%, median age 57.0) were classified as ""no risk"" group; 80 patients (76.2%, median age 68.5) as "low risk" group; No patients as "high risk" group. Predictors of survival were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score of 3 or 4 (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.93; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.21-3.10), hemoglobin less than 10 g/dL (HR = 1.97; 95% CI = 1.25-3.10) and C-reactive protein more than 1.0 mg/dL (HR = 1.95; 95% CI = 1.21-3.13). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed significant differences in the survival between KNNRS groups: ""no risk"" group: 6.1 ± 1.4 months (95% CI = 3.37-8.83); ""low risk"" group: 3.4 ± 0.9 months (95% CI = 1.5-5.37). Conclusions : Nutritional status according to KNNRS wasn't significant predictor of survival for patients with metastatic cancer. Improvement of KNNRS score thresholds is needed.

• Korean Journal of Community Nutrition
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.3-12
• /
• 2000

The nutritional and health status of low-income alone-living elderly(ALE) was assessed in relation to the activity of daily living (ADL) and nutritional risk factors. One hundred and eighty five ALE over 65 years old, living in the Sungnam area, were interviewed in their homes through questionnaires. The results were as follows : 63.6% of the subjects considered themselves in poor the health and only 4.3% of them considered thermselves healthy. 89.7% of the subjects answered that they were suffering from illness and 29.7% were taking medication. The ADL was assessed through 10 checklist items and the average score of the ADL was $84.78{\pm}11.11$(maximum :100) The nutritional risk index(NRI) was evaluated by 12 risk factors and the average score of the NRI was $4.43{\pm}1.38$ (maximumː12) The scores of the ADL were positively correlated with the scored of the instrumental activities of daily living (IADL)(r=0.7523, p<0.001) and negatively correlated with NRI(r= -0.2694, p<0.001) When subjects were divided into nutritionally high risk group(HNARI: TEX>$NRI{\geq}5$) and nutritionally low risk group(LNRI : NRI<5) according to the USA screening basis, 48.9% of the subjects belonged to the HNRI, But 16.9% of the HNRI and 34.4% of the LNRI belonged to the fourth quartile($Q_{0.75}$) of the ADL, the distribution of which showed significant differences(p<0.05) We suggest that the application of the ADL as a screening tool for nutrition intervention programs for the elderly. Oncemore, further research is needed to develop appropriate checklist items for the ADL and NRI along with the screening basis for the NRI 새 diagnose the adverse nutritional status of the Korean elderly.

• Journal of Nutrition and Health
• /
• v.52 no.4
• /
• pp.332-341
• /
• 2019

Purpose: Poor nutrition in hospitalized patients is closely linked to an increased risk of infection, which can result in complications affecting mortality, as well as increased length of hospital stay and hospital costs. Therefore, adequate nutritional support is essential to manage the nutritional risk status of patients. Nutritional support needs to be preceded by nutrition screening, in which accuracy is crucial, particularly for the initial screening. To perform initial nutrition screening of hospitalized patients, we used the Catholic Kwandong University (CKU) Nutritional Risk Screening (CKUNRS) tool, originally developed at CKU Hospital. To validate CKUNRS against the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) tool, which is considered the gold standard for nutritional risk screening, results from both tools were compared. Methods: Nutritional status was evaluated in 686 adult patients admitted to CKU Hospital from May 1 to July 31, 2018 using both CKUNRS and PG-SGA. Collected data were analyzed, and the results compared, to validate CKUNRS as a nutrition screening tool. Results: The comparison of CKUNRS and PG-SGA revealed that the prevalence of nutritional risk on admission was 15.6% (n = 107) with CKUNRS and 44.6% (n = 306) with PG-SGA. The sensitivity and specificity of CKUNRS to evaluate nutritional risk status were 98.7% (96.8 ~ 99.5) and 33.3% (28.1 ~ 39.0), respectively. Thus, the sensitivity was higher, but the specificity lower compared with PG-SGA. Cohen's kappa coefficient was 0.34, indicating valid agreement between the two tools. Conclusion: This study found concordance between CKUNRS and PG-SGA. However, the prevalence of nutritional risk in hospitalized patients was higher when determined by CKUNRS, compared with that by PG-SGA. Accordingly, CKUNRS needs further modification and improvement in terms of screening criteria to promote more effective nutritional support for patients who have been admitted for inpatient care.