Identifying nutrition risk in emergency patients: What is the most appropriate screening tool?

BACKGROUND

The emergency department (ED) is the most frequent access route to the hospital. Nutrition risk (NR) screening allows the early identification of patients at risk of malnutrition. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and predictive validity of five different tools in EDs: Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002), Nutritional Risk Emergency 2017 (NRE-2017), Royal Free Hospital-Nutritional Prioritizing Tool (RFH-NPT), Malnutrition Universal Screening (MUST), and Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST).

METHODS

Patients with scores ≥3 according to the NRS-2002, ≥1.5 according to the NRE-2017, and ≥2 according to the MUST, RFH-NPT, or MST were classified with NR. Prolonged length of stay (LOS) and 1-year mortality were evaluated.

RESULTS

431 patients were evaluated (57.31 ± 15.6 years of age; 54.4% women) in a public hospital in southern Brazil. The prevalence of NR was: 35% according to the NRS-2002, 43% according to the MST, 45% according to the NRE-2017 and MUST, and 49% according to the RFH-NPT. Patients with NR, had a greater risk of prolonged LOS (P < 0.001). The presence of NR was associated with an increased risk of 1-year mortality according to the NRS-2002 (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.04; 95% CI, 2.513-6.503), MST (HR: 2.60; 95% CI, 1.701-3.996), NRE-2017 (HR: 4.82; 95% CI, 2.753-8.443), MUST (HR: 4.00; 95% CI, 2.385-6.710), and RFH-NPT (HR: 5.43; 95% CI, 2.984-9.907).

CONCLUSIONS

NRE-2017 does not require objective data and presented predictive validity for all outcomes assessed, regardless of the severity of the disease, and thus appears to be the most appropriate tool for carrying out NR screening in the ED.

A longitudinal study to determine if all critically ill patients should be considered at nutrition risk or is there a highly accurate screening tool to be adopted?

BACKGROUND

Nutrition risk is prevalent in intensive care unit (ICU) settings and related to poor prognoses. We aimed to evaluate the concurrent and predictive validity of different nutrition risk screening tools in the ICU.

METHODS

Data were collected between 2019 and 2022 in six ICUs (n = 450). Nutrition risk was evaluated by modified Nutrition Risk in Critically ill (mNUTRIC), Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS-2002), Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST), Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), and Nutritional Risk in Emergency (NRE-2017). Accuracy and agreement of the tools were assessed; logistic regression was used to verify the association between nutrition risk and prolonged ICU stay; Cox regression was used for mortality in the ICU, both with adjustment for confounders.

RESULTS

NRS-2002 ≥5 showed the best accuracy (0.63 [95% CI, 0.58-0.69]) with mNUTRIC, and MST with NRS-2002 ≥5 (0.76 [95% CI, 0.71-0.80]). All tools had a poor/fair agreement with mNUTRIC (k = 0.019-0.268) and moderate agreement with NRS-2002 ≥5 (k = 0.474-0.503). MUST (2.26 [95% CI 1.40-3.63]) and MST (1.69 [95% CI, 1.09-2.60]) predicted death in the ICU, and the NRS-2002 ≥5 (1.56 [95% CI 1.02-2.40]) and mNUTRIC (1.86 [95% CI, 1.26-2.76]) predicted prolonged ICU stay.

CONCLUSION

No nutrition risk screening tool demonstrated a satisfactory concurrent validity; only the MUST and MST predicted ICU mortality and the NRS-2002 ≥5 and mNUTRIC predicted prolonged ICU stay, suggesting that it could be appropriate to adopt the ESPEN recommendation to assess nutrition status in patients with ≥48 h in the ICU.

Prevalence of low calf circumference in hospitalized patients classified by raw or body mass index-adjusted values

BACKGROUND

Adiposity can influence the estimation of muscle mass using calf circumference (CC) and underestimate the frequency of low CC. An adjustment for CC using body mass index (BMI) was proposed to reduce this effect. We aimed to compare the low CC frequency in hospitalized patients when considering raw and BMI-adjusted values and explore data by sex, age, and race (white and non-white).

METHODS

Secondary analysis from two cohort studies conducted with adult hospitalized patients using BMI and CC data collected in the first 72 h after hospital admission. We classified low CC by two approaches: (1) raw CC; (2) BMI-adjusted CC for patients with BMI ≥ 25. Cutoff values for low CC were ≤34 cm (men) and ≤33 cm (women).

RESULTS

Among 1272 patients (54.1 ± 15.3 years old; 51.7% women; 82.1% White race), low CC frequency was 30.6% and low BMI-adjusted CC was 68.9%. For all elevated BMI categories, the low CC frequency was higher when considering BMI-adjusted values (P < 0.001). Low CC was more frequent (P < 0.001) in older adults (38.7% by raw; 79.1% by BMI-adjusted value) than in younger adults (27.6% by raw; 65.2% by BMI-adjusted value) and it was not associated with race. Low CC by raw values was more frequent in men than in women (35.0% versus 26.4%; P = 0.001), but did not differ between sexes when classified by BMI-adjusted values (70.7% versus 67.1%; P = 0.184).

CONCLUSION

Low CC BMI adjusted was 2.2 times more frequent in comparison with raw CC values, and it was identified in >60% of patients with BMI ≥ 25.

Validity of nutrition screening tools for risk of malnutrition among hospitalized adult patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUNDS & AIMS

Malnutrition is prevalent among hospitalized patients in developed countries, contributing to negative health outcomes and increased healthcare costs. Timely identification and management of malnutrition are crucial. The lack of a universally accepted definition and standardized diagnostic criteria for malnutrition has led to the development of various screening tools, each with varying validity. This complicates early identification of malnutrition, hindering effective intervention strategies. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify the most valid and reliable nutritional screening tool for assessing the risk of malnutrition in hospitalized adults.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted to identify validation studies published from inception to November 2023, in the Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases. This systematic review was registered in INPLASY (INPLASY202090028). The risk of bias and quality of included studies were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies version 2 (QUADAS-2). Meta-analyses were performed for screening tools accuracy using the symmetric hierarchical summary receiver operative characteristics models.

RESULTS

Of the 1646 articles retrieved, 60 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review, and 21 were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 51 malnutrition risk screening tools and 9 reference standards were identified. The meta-analyses assessed four common malnutrition risk screening tools against two reference standards (Subjective Global Assessment [SGA] and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism [ESPEN] criteria). The Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) vs SGA had a sensitivity (95% Confidence Interval) of 0.84 (0.73-0.91), and specificity of 0.85 (0.75-0.91). The MUST vs ESPEN had a sensitivity of 0.97 (0.53-0.99) and specificity of 0.80 (0.50-0.94). The Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST) vs SGA had a sensitivity of 0.81 (0.67-0.90) and specificity of 0.79 (0.72-0.74). The Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form (MNA-SF) vs ESPEN had a sensitivity of 0.99 (0.41-0.99) and specificity of 0.60 (0.45-0.73). The Nutrition Universal Screening Tool-2002 (NRS-2002) vs SGA had a sensitivity of 0.76 (0.58-0.87) and specificity of 0.86 (0.76-0.93).

CONCLUSIONS

The MUST demonstrated high accuracy in detecting malnutrition risk in hospitalized adults. However, the quality of the studies included varied greatly, possibly introducing bias in the results. Future research should compare tools within a specific patient population using a valid and universal gold standard to ensure improved patient care and outcomes.

Derivation of the Screening of Nutritional Risk in Intensive Care risk prediction score: A secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

For patients who are critically ill, the recommended nutrition risk screening tools are the Nutrition Risk in the Critically Ill (NUTRIC) and the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002) have limitations.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a new screening tool, the Screening of Nutritional Risk in Intensive Care (SCREENIC score), and assess its predictive validity.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study was conducted. Variables from several nutritional screening and assessment tools were considered. The high nutrition risk cutoff point was defined using mNUTRIC as a reference. Predictive validity was evaluated using logistic regression and Cox regression.

RESULTS

The study included 450 patients (64 [54-71] years, 52.2% men). The SCREENIC score comprised six questions: (1) does the patient have ≥2 comorbidities (1.3 points); (2) was the patient hospitalized for ≥2 days before intensive care unit (ICU) admission (0.9 points); (3) does the patient have sepsis (1.0 point); (4) was the patient on mechanical ventilation upon ICU admission (1.2 points); (5) is the patient aged >65 years (1.2 points); and (6) does the patient exhibit signs of moderate/severe muscle mass loss according to the physical exam (0.6 points). The high nutrition risk cutoff point was set at 4.0. SCREENIC demonstrated moderate agreement (κ = 0.564) and high accuracy (0.896 [95% CI, 0.867-0.925]) with mNUTRIC. It predicted prolonged ICU (odds ratio [OR] = 1.81 [95% CI, 1.14-2.85]) and hospital stay (OR = 2.15 [95% CI, 1.37-3.38]).

CONCLUSION

The SCREENIC score comprises questions with variables that do not require nutrition history. Further evaluation of its applicability, reproducibility, and validity in guiding nutrition therapy is needed using large external cohorts.

Prevalence and Economic Burden of Malnutrition Diagnosis Among Patients Presenting to United States Emergency Departments

BACKGROUND

Malnutrition is a potentially remediable condition that when untreated contributes to poor health and economic outcomes. While assessment of malnutrition risk is improving, its identification rate and economic burden in emergency departments (EDs) is largely unknown. We sought to determine prevalence and economic burden of diagnosed malnutrition among patients presenting to U.S. EDs.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Emergency Department Sample data. Malnutrition prevalence was confirmed via International Classification of Diseases, 9th Edition, diagnosis codes. The economic burden was assessed by comparing probability of hospitalization and the average total charges between propensity-score matched visits with and without a malnutrition diagnosis.

RESULTS

Data from 238 million ED visits between 2006 and 2014 were analyzed. Over this period, the prevalence of diagnosed malnutrition increased for all demographic categories assessed. For older adults (≥65 years), the prevalence increased from 2.5% (2006) to 3.6% (2014). Older age, high-income community residence, Western region, urban areas, and Medicare coverage were associated with higher diagnosis prevalence. Malnutrition diagnosis was associated with a 4.23 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.93 to 4.55) times higher odds of hospitalization and $21,892 higher mean total charges (95% CI = $19,593 to $24,192).

CONCLUSIONS

While malnutrition is currently diagnosed at a low rate in U.S. EDs, the economic burden of malnutrition is substantial in this care setting. Given the potential for systematic malnutrition screening and treatment protocols to alleviate this burden, future research is warranted.

The Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index is a powerful predictor of adverse outcome in the elderly emergency surgery patient

BACKGROUND

The degree to which malnutrition impacts perioperative outcomes in the elderly emergency surgery (ES) patient remains unknown. We aimed to study the relationship between malnutrition, as measured by the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI), and postoperative outcomes in elderly patients undergoing ES.

METHODS

Using the 2007 to 2016 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, all patients 65 years or older undergoing ES were included in our study. The GNRI, defined as (1.489 × albumin [g/L]) + (41.7 × [weight/ideal weight]) was calculated for each patient in the database. Patients with missing height, weight, or preoperative albumin data were excluded. Patients were divided into four malnutrition groups: very severe (GNRI < 73), severe (GNRI, 73-82), moderate (GNRI, 82-92), and mild (GNRI, 92-98). Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index greater than 98 constituted the normal nutrition group. Risk-adjusted multivariable logistic regressions were performed to study the relationship between malnutrition-measured using either GNRI, albumin level, or body mass index less than 18.5 kg/m-and the following postoperative outcomes: 30-day mortality, 30-day morbidity (including infectious and noninfectious complications), and hospital length of stay. The relationship between GNRI score and 30-day mortality for six common ES procedures was then assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 82,725 patients were included in the final analyses. Of these, 55,214 were malnourished with GNRI less than 98 (66.74%). Risk-adjusted multivariable analyses showed that, as malnutrition worsened from mild to very severe, the risk of mortality, morbidity, and the hospital length of stay progressively increased (all p < 0.05). Patients with very severe malnutrition had at least a twofold increased likelihood of mortality (odds ratio [OR], 2.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.57-3.03), deep vein thrombosis (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.77-2.42), and respiratory failure (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.81-2.11). Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index predicted mortality better than albumin or body mass index alone for ES.

CONCLUSION

Malnutrition, measured using GNRI, is a strong independent predictor of adverse outcomes in the elderly ES patient and could be used to assess the nutrition status and counsel patients (and families) preoperatively.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic study, Level IV.

Calf Circumference Is a Good Predictor of Longer Hospital Stay and Nutritional Risk in Emergency Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the validity of calf circumference (CC) in identifying malnourished patients and patients at nutritional risk and determine the association between CC and clinical outcomes of hospitalized patients.Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted involving patients admitted to the emergency department of a tertiary hospital in the first 48 hours of admission. Nutritional risk was determined using Nutritional Risk Screening, malnutrition was diagnosed using subjective global assessment, and CC was manually measured. Brazilian cutoff points for CC were used to identify low muscle mass. The outcomes of interest were length of emergency care and hospital stay, occurrence of infection, and death, besides nutritional risk and malnutrition.Results: In total, 528 patients (52.76 ± 16.18 years; 54.6% females) were followed up for 9.0 (3.0-19.0) days; 39.6% of them had reduced CC values. The accuracy of CC in identifying patients at nutritional risk and malnourished patients was 67.7% and 54.1%, respectively. The cutoff value of 36.5 cm was highly accurate in identifying nutritional risk [AUC-ROC curve = 0.764 (95% CI: 0.704-0.825) for men, and AUC-ROC curve = 0.716 (95% CI: 0.659-0.774) for women]. Patients with low CC had a 1.59-fold (95% CI: 1.07-2.36) greater likelihood of a long hospital stay than patients with normal CC.Conclusions: Low CC values have satisfactory validity in identifying nutritional risk and are associated with long hospital stay.

Two variants of the Nutritional Risk in the Critically Ill Score as predictors of mortality in Intensive Care Unit patients at a Brazilian University Hospital

ABSTRACT Objective To evaluate the agreement between the modified version of the Nutritional Risk in the Critically Ill Score (without Interleukin-6) and a variant composed of C-Reactive Protein as well as its capacity to predict mortality. Methods A prospective cohort study was carried out with 315 patients in an Intensive Care Unit of a university hospital from October 2017 to April 2018. The agreement between the instruments was evaluated using the Kappa test. The predictive capacity for estimating mortality was assessed with the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve. Results The critical patients involved in the study had a mean age of 60.8±16.3 years and 53.5% were female. Most patients had C-Reactive Protein levels ?10mg/dL (n=263, 83.5%) and their admission in the Intensive Care Unit was medical (n=219, 69.5%). The prevalence of mortality was observed in 41.0% of the evaluated patients. The proportions at high nutritional risk according to Nutritional Risk in the Critically Ill without Interleukin-6 and with C-Reactive Protein were 57.5% and 55.6%, respectively. The tools showed strong and significant agreement(Kappa=0.935; p=0.020) and satisfactory performances in predicting mortality (area under the curve 0.695 [0.636-0.754] and 0.699 [0.640-0.758]). Conclusion Both versions of the Nutritional Risk in the Critically Ill tool show a satisfactory agreement and performance as predictors of mortality in critically ill patients. Further analysis of this variant and the association between nutrition adequacy and mortality is needed.

Major Predictors of Incidence of Congestive Heart Failure and the Responsive Character of Enteral Nutrition: Meta-Analysis

Background

Statistical data from the USA estimate that 5.7 million Americans over 20 years of age have congestive heart failure (CHF) and this number is expected to increase approximately 46.0% between 2012 and 2030. In Brazil, there are no epidemiological studies involving the incidence of heart failure; however, according to other countries, it can be estimated that up to 6.4 million Brazilians suffer from this syndrome. Randomized and controlled clinical studies on the efficacy of enteral nutrition (EN) in patients with CHF are lacking. The aim of the present study was to perform a systematic review of the main predictors of CHF that promote EN, as well as to find if the literary findings were conclusive in the efficacy of EN for treatment and prophylaxis of CHF.

Methods

A total of 105 papers were submitted to the eligibility analysis, after which 28 studies were selected, following the rules of the systematic review - PRISMA. The search strategy was followed in MEDLINE/Pubmed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect Journals (Elsevier), Scopus (Elsevier) and ONEFile (Gale), with the following steps: search for mesh terms and use of bouleanos “and” between terms and “or” between historical findings.

Results

The present study listed the major predictors of CHF with indication for EN. After testing the normality of each group of variables of causes of decompensation in CHF, it was analyzed that all the variables did not present normal distribution, with P < 0.10. Thus, a non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis analysis was performed, obtaining P > 0.05 in all analyses, that is, in all groups of causes of decompensation in CHF, there was no statistical difference in each group studied.

Conclusion

There is still no known influence of the efficacy of EN on increasing survival and reducing the morbidity of patients with CHF because there are few clinical trials that have evaluated this question; however, EN is very indicated in the attempt to mitigate the weight loss in these patients.