Patient- and Nutrition-Derived Outcome Risk Assessment Score as a Predictor of Mortality in Critically Ill Surgical Patients: A Retrospective, Single-Center Observational Study

Validation of GLIM malnutrition criteria for diagnosis of malnutrition in ICU patients: An observational study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) are at high risk of malnutrition. The only validated malnutrition assessment tool is the Subjective Global Assessment (SGA). The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) is a new malnutrition assessment tool. The present study compares the nutrition-related parameters of the following tools: GLIM tool, SGA, Phase Angle (PA), Low Fat-Free Mass Index (FFMI), and Patient- and Nutrition-Derived Outcome Risk Assessment score (PANDORA), in an attempt to validate an objective tool.

METHODS

Eighty-four ICU patients were included. The tools mentioned above were assessed for their validity in diagnosing malnutrition. All patients were defined as suffering from acute disease and received medical nutrition therapy. To evaluate whether there is a correlation between the GLIM criteria, SGA, PA, and low FFMI, we compared the SGA, PA, and low FFMI to the GLIM criteria using Spearman correlation coefficients and a Chi-square test. Also, a Mann-Whitney U test was used to test the mean differences between the GLIM criteria and the PANDORA. The area under the curve (AUC) of the proposed parameters was evaluated for diagnosis of malnutrition to seek cutoff points that yield good sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS

Mean age was 50 ± 20 years, BMI 25.3 ± 5.1 kg/m², APACHE II 20.5 ± 7.7, PANDORA score 32 ± 8.5. GLIM malnutrition criteria were significantly correlated with the gold standard SGA assessment and with low FFMI, with PA (Phase Angle), and with the PANDORA score. The area under the curve, by using the ROC curve analysis for GLIM criteria stratified by the SGA results, was 0.85 (P < 0.001). Sensitivity was 85%, and specificity 79%. However, when comparing the low FFMI, PA, and PANDORA to the GLIM criteria, the ROC curve analysis results were considered poor rank.

CONCLUSIONS

The SGA malnutrition assessment highly validated the GLIM criteria framework combined with the two-criteria diagnosis of malnutrition with a high level of precision. The GLIM malnutrition assessment seems to be acceptable in the ICU setting.

Nutritional status of patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit: A comprehensive report from Iranian hospitals, 2018

INTRODUCTION AND AIM

Malnutrition is a complication of hospitalization in critically ill patients. This event is occurred because of disease and therapeutic processes for curing the patients. Determination of nutritional status helps physicians and clinical nutritionists decide on the best regimen which should be prescribed for a patient. In the current study, we aimed to report the nutritional status ofpatientshospitalizedin the intensive care unit (ICU).

METHOD OF STUDY

We used three standard tolls, including Subjective global assessment (SGA), Nutrition Risk in the Critically Ill (NUTRIC) Score and nutrition risk screening (NRS) questionnaires via a multi-stage sampling for different ICU wards of 32 university hospitals in Iran. Frequencies and rates of nutritional scores, comparative studies, and determined agreement of scoring systems and nutritional status in any ward of hospitals were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were 771 males and 540 female Cancer and trauma patients had the best and worst nutritional scores, respectively. Using NRS and NUTRIC, the low-risk scores were more frequent than thehigh-riskscores among ICU patients. SGA showed that most patients were in grades A (well nutritional status) or B (moderate nutritional status), andfew caseswere in grade C (poor nutritional status).The high-risk nutritional score wasobtained for older patients. NUTRIC and NRS had better agreement for diagnosis and differentiation of malnutrition than NUTRIC-SGA or NRS-SGA pairs. However, there was no strong agreement between the mentioned pairs.

CONCLUSION

Nutritional status of patients hospitalized in ICU wards in Iran wassomewhat better than other countries that this could be due to the highly observed guidelines of patient's care in Iran. Anyway,it is suggested that a more precise tool of nutritional scoresto be validated for patients hospitalized in ICU·In addition, better medical care needs a well evaluation of nutritional insufficiencies and what is necessary for compensation using complementary regimens.