• 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.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.

• 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.

• Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Nutrition
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.90-99
• /
• 2021

Purpose: Nutrition screening is vital to ensure patients are appropriately managed in hospital. In paediatrics there is currently no universally accepted nutrition screening tool. The Nutrition Evaluation Screening Tool (NEST) was developed as an easy to use and practical screening tool for hospitalised children. We aim to evaluate compliance of the NEST and assess agreement of the NEST with the already validated nutrition screening tools, Screening Tool for Risk on Nutritional Status and Growth (STRONGkids), Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition in Paediatrics (STAMP) and the Subjective Global Nutritional Assessment (SGNA) tool. Methods: Retrospective review of 102 patient episodes at the Evelina London Children's Hospital. Electronic records were used to assess NEST compliance and to complete the nutrition tools for each patient episode. Cohen's kappa was used to determine the level of agreement between each nutrition tool. Results: There was moderate agreement between the NEST and the two screening tools, STRONGkids (κ=0.472) and STAMP (κ=0.416) for patients on initial screening at admission. 87.2% of patient episodes were NEST compliant within 24 hours of admission to hospital. Conclusion: The moderate agreement between these two already validated screening tools enhances the NEST's validity as a paediatric screening tool. The NEST had the strongest correlation with the SGNA tool compared to other screening tools. The NEST is user friendly screening tool for hospitalised children.

• 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.

• Korean Journal of Community Nutrition
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.280-295
• /
• 2021

Objectives: This study aimed to examine the characteristics of patients according to their nutritional status as assessed by five nutritional screening tools: Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA), NUTRISCORE, Nutritional Risk Index (NRI), Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), and Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) and to compare the agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of these tools. Methods: A total of 952 gastric cancer patients who underwent gastrectomy and chemotherapy from January 2009 to December 2012 at the Samsung Medical Center were included. We categorized patients into malnourished and normal according to the five nutritional screening tools 1 month after surgery and compared their characteristics. We also calculated the Spearman partial correlation, Cohen's Kappa coefficient, the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of each pair of screening tools. Results: We observed 86.24% malnutrition based on the PG-SGA and 85.82% based on the NUTRISCORE among gastric cancer patients in our study. When we applied NRI or CONUT, however, the malnutrition levels were less than 30%. Patients with malnutrition as assessed by the PG-SGA, NUTRISCORE, or NRI had lower intakes of energy and protein compared to normal patients. When NRI, PNI, or CONUT were used to identify malnutrition, lower levels of albumin, hemoglobin, total lymphocyte count, total cholesterol, and longer postoperative hospital stays were observed among patients with malnutrition compared to those without malnutrition. We found relatively high agreement between PG-SGA and NUTRISCORE; sensitivity was 90.86% and AUC was 0.78. When we compared NRI and PNI, sensitivity was 99.64% and AUC was 0.97. AUC ranged from 0.50 to 0.67 for comparisons between CONUT and each of the other nutritional screening tools. Conclusions: Our study suggests that PG-SGA and NRI have a relatively high agreement with the NUTRISCORE and PNI, respectively. Further cohort studies are needed to examine whether the nutritional status assessed by PG-SGA, NUTRISCORE, NRI, PNI, and CONUT predicts the gastric cancer prognosis.

• Korean Journal of Community Nutrition
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.205-222
• /
• 2022

Objectives: This study examined the characteristics of patients according to nutritional status assessed by five nutritional screening tools: Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA), NUTRISCORE, Nutritional Risk Index (NRI), Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), and Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) and to compare the agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of these tools. Methods: A total of 952 gastric cancer patients who underwent gastrectomy and chemotherapy from January 2009 to December 2012 were included. The patients were categorized into malnutrition and normal status according to five nutritional screening tools one month after surgery. The Spearman partial correlation, Cohen's Kappa coefficient, the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of each two screening tools were calculated. Results: Malnutrition was observed in 86.24% of patients based on the PG-SGA and 85.82% based on the NUTRISCORE. When NRI or CONUT were applied, the proportions of malnutrition were < 30%. Patients with malnutrition had lower intakes of energy and protein than normal patients when assessed using the PG-SGA, NUTRISCORE, or NRI. Lower levels of albumin, hemoglobin, total lymphocyte count, and total cholesterol and longer postoperative hospital stays were observed among patients with malnutrition compared to normal patients when NRI, PNI, or CONUT were applied. Relatively high agreement for NUTRISCORE relative to PG-SGA was found; the sensitivity was 90.86%, and the AUC was 0.78. When NRI, PNI, and CONUT were compared, the sensitivities were 23.72% for PNI relative to NRI, 44.53% for CONUT relative to NRI, and 90.91% for CONUT relative to PNI. The AUCs were 0.95 for NRI relative to PNI and 0.91 for CONUT relative to PNI. Conclusions: NUTRISCORE had a high sensitivity compared to PG-SGA, and CONUT had a high sensitivity compared to PNI. NRI had a high specificity compared to PNI. This relatively high sensitivity and specificity resulted in 77.00% agreement between PNI and CONUT and 77.94% agreement between NRI and PNI. Further cohort studies will be needed to determine if the nutritional status assessed by PG-SGA, NUTRISCORE, NRI, PNI, and CONUT predicts the gastric cancer prognosis.

• 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.

• Journal of Korea Association of Health Promotion
• /
• v.4 no.1
• /
• pp.1-11
• /
• 2006

"본 논문은 대한외과학회지 2006년 제70권제1호에 실렸던 논문으로 대한외과학회 편집위원회 승인을 득하고 본 협회지에 게재함. Purpose: Malnutrition has been frequently reported for patients on their admission to the hospital and it has been associated with an increase in morbidity, mortality and the length of the hospital stay. Although a number of screening tools have been developed to identify those patients at risk for malnutrition, there is no' gold standard' for defining malnutrition and the malnourished patients remain largely unrecognized. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of a nutritional screening tool for use in Dankook University Hospital. Methods Nutritional evaluation was performed for 53 patients who were admitted to the department of surgery and internal medicine between October and December 2004. The screening tool was completed by the ward nurse and the nutritional support team nurse on the same patients within24 hours of admission. The nutritional support team nurse performed the full assessment. The screening sheet included 4 questions regarding body mass index, recent unintentional weight loss, food intake and disease severity. Each answer was scored and a total of 5 was tested as the criterion fey malnutrition. The full assessment included current body weight, recent weight loss, triceps skinfold thickness, mid-arm muscle circumference, serum albumin)in and total lymphocyte count. Malnutrition was defined by 3 or more values below the reference values. The reliability of the screening tool was assessed using kappa statistic. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were calculated to evaluate the validity of the screening tool. The receiver operating characteristic(ROC) curve was drawn to choose a cutoff valve that maximizes sensitivity and specificity. Results' The level of agreement between the ward nurse and the NST nurse was good for BMI and food intake and moderate for weight loss and disease severity. The full assessment identified7 patients(13.2%) as malnourished. The screening sheet had a sensitivity of 86% and a specificity of 80%. According to the ROC curve, a score of 5 points provided the best validity. Conclusion The nutritional screening tool is reliable when completed by different observers and it is valid for nutritional assessment.