Using a Patient-Completed Food Frequency Questionnaire to Determine Mediterranean Diet Score in People with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Purpose: To examine the level of agreement between a patient-completed food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) and assessment of usual intake by a registered dietitian (RD) to score adherence to a Mediterranean diet (MedD) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).Methods: Patients with IBD completed a short FFQ and were subsequently interviewed by an RD. A 12-item MedD score (MDS), adapted from the Mediterranean Diet Adherence Screener (MEDAS), was calculated from the FFQ and RD assessments. To determine agreement between individual items, Cohen's kappa coefficients were calculated. Absolute agreement between assessment methods was quantified using a one-way random intra-class correlation coefficient for a single measure.Results: Forty-six patients with IBD participated. The mean FFQ-MDS was 4.59 (standard deviation [SD] = 1.65), and mean RD-MDS was 4.83 (SD = 1.53). Kappa coefficients for individual MEDAS items ranged from 0.41 to 0.78 (p < 0.01) between the FFQ- and RD-MDS. Most items demonstrated moderate to substantial agreement. The intra-class correlation coefficient for absolute agreement between the summed FFQ-MDS and RD-MDS was 0.71 (95% confidence interval: 0.52-0.83, p < 0.001), indicating moderate reliability.Conclusions: This patient-completed FFQ may be a promising tool in clinical practice and research and would benefit from additional evaluation to validate its use in patients with IBD.

Optimal Nutritional Support Strategy Based on the Association between Modified NUTRIC Score and 28-Day Mortality in Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective Study

Malnutrition in critically ill patients is closely linked with clinical outcomes. During acute inflammatory states, nutrition cannot reverse the loss of body cell mass completely. Studies on nutritional screening and strategy considering metabolic changes have not yet been conducted. We aimed to identify nutrition strategies using the modified Nutrition Risk in the Critically ill (mNUTIRC) score. Nutrition support data, laboratory nutrition indicators, and prognosis indices were prospectively collected on the 2nd and 7th day after admission. It was to identify the effect of the changes on the metabolic status and critical target of nutrition intervention. To discriminate the high-risk group of malnutrition, receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted. Risk factors associated with 28 day-mortality were evaluated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. A total of 490 and 266 patients were analyzed on the 2nd and 7th day, respectively. Only the mNUTRIC score showed significant differences in nutritional risk stratification. The use of vasopressors, hypoprotein supply (<1.0 g/kg/day), high mNUTRIC score, and hypoalbuminemia (<2.5 mg/dL) in the recovery phase were strongly associated with a 28-day mortality. The implementation of the mNUTRIC score and protein supply in the post-acute phase is critical to improve 28-day mortality in critically ill patients.

The Low Sensitivity and Specificity of a Nutrition Screening Tool in Real Circumstances in a Tertiary Care Hospital Setting

Nutrition screening is an essential process to detect children at risk of malnutrition during hospitalization and provide appropriate nutrition management. STRONGkids is a nutrition screening tool which has been implemented in a tertiary-care hospital service in Bangkok, Thailand. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of STRONGkids in the real-situation setting. Electronic Medical Records (EMR) of hospitalized pediatric patients aged 1 month to 18 years from January to December 2019 were reviewed. Those with incomplete medical records and re-admission within 30 days were excluded. Nutrition risk scores and clinical data were collected. Anthropometric data were calculated to Z-score based on the WHO growth standard. The sensitivity (SEN) and specificity (SPE) of STRONGkids were determined against malnutrition status and clinical outcomes. In total, 3914 EMRs (2130 boys, mean age 6.22 ± 4.72 years) were reviewed. The prevalence of acute malnutrition (BMI-for-age Z-score < -2) and stunting (height-for-age Z-score < -2) were 12.9 and 20.5%. SEN and SPE of STRONGkids against acute malnutrition were 63.2 and 55.6%, stunting values were 60.6 and 56.7%, and overall malnutrition values were 59.8 and 58.6%. STRONGkids had low SEN and SPE to detect nutrition risks among hospitalized children in a tertiary-care setting. Further actions are required to improve the quality of nutrition screening in hospital services.

Development and validation of an inflammatory bowel disease nutrition self-screening tool (IBD-NST) for digital use

Background and aim

The identification of, and timely intervention for, patients with impaired nutritional status may reduce inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) complications. This study aimed to develop and validate an IBD-specific nutrition self-screening tool (IBD-NST) that identifies patients at nutrition risk.

Methods

An expert IBD panel was consulted to support development of an IBD-NST. The tool was assessed in different cohorts of patients attending IBD outpatient clinics for face, content and convergent validity and repeat reliability. The tool was compared with (i) the malnutrition universal screening tool to assess face validity and (ii) subjective global assessment (SGA), hand-grip strength (HGS) and mid-arm muscle circumference to assess convergent validity. Tool content was informed by agreement between assessment tools, sensitivity analysis and chi-squared tests. The IBD-NST was completed electronically twice, 1 week apart to assess repeat reliability using observed agreement and kappa statistic. Statistical significance assumed at p < 0.05.

Results

In total, 282 IBD patients (175 with Crohn's disease) were recruited to validate the IBD-NST. The final validated IBD-NST includes body mass index (BMI), weight loss and IBD-specific nutrition-focussed questions which were acceptable to patients. It identified patients at risk of malnutrition, moderately or severely malnourished patients and patients at nutritional risk. The IBD-NST identified 54/179 (30%) patients at moderate or high nutrition risk and had excellent repeat reliability in 85 patients [r = 0.77 (95% CI 0.669 to 0.746)].

Conclusion

The IBD-NST is a self-screening tool, validated for use as either a paper or e-health version, that identifies patients at nutrition risk who are likely to benefit from dietetic assessment and intervention. Furthermore, patients with IBD symptoms who are concerned about their dietary intake can potentially access dietetic care more easily therefore encouraging greater self-management of IBD-related symptoms. The routine use of the IBD-NST as a self-screening tool would enable patient-led care in the outpatient setting and may facilitate timely access to dietetic care.

A Pilot Study To Compare Nutrition Screening Tools: Customized Nutrition Screening Tool for Burn Patients (Nstb) and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (Must)

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.