Jose J, Louri N, Al Jabbar N, Dey N, Showaiter M, Al Mannai M, Ebrahim F. A Pilot Study To Compare Nutrition Screening Tools: Customized Nutrition Screening Tool for Burn Patients (Nstb) and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (Must).
Ann Burns Fire Disasters 2022;
35:265-271. [PMID:
38680630 PMCID:
PMC11041966]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2021] [Accepted: 10/15/2021] [Indexed: 05/01/2024]
Abstract
Nutrition screening is an initial procedure in which the risk of malnutrition is identified. It plays a role in and can incur costs to health systems and patients. A customized nutrition screening tool for burn patients (NSTB) was formulated and the nutritional risk score of 22 patients from a burn unit in Bahrain using NSTB and MUST was compared. The samples selected were adult patients aged 18 years or over; pregnant and mentally retarded patients were excluded. Mean age of the total sample was 29.40, and 90.9% were male. Mean BMI was 26.96. The mean and SD for NSTB was 2.18±1.65, and for MUST 2.0±0.0. A difference in the nutritional screening risk score of the same group of patients was observed. In the MUST group, 100% patients were classified as high risk, while in the NSTB group 50% patients were classified as high risk, 36.36% as moderate risk and 13.63% as low risk respectively. The variability of the risk score in the NSTB group helps prioritize the patients based on high, medium, and low risk, whereas MUST categorizes all patients as high risk. A unique screening tool for burns will be more effective in determining risk patients due to tailor-made characteristics. Even though the data sample is small, the difference gives scope for extensive study.
Collapse