17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Malnutrition Screening and Assessment

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Malnutrition is a serious problem with a negative impact on the quality of life and the evolution of patients, contributing to an increase in morbidity, length of hospital stay, mortality, and health spending. Early identification is fundamental to implement the necessary therapeutic actions, involving adequate nutritional support to prevent or reverse malnutrition. This review presents two complementary methods of fighting malnutrition: nutritional screening and nutritional assessment. Nutritional risk screening is conducted using simple, quick-to-perform tools, and is the first line of action in detecting at-risk patients. It should be implemented systematically and periodically on admission to hospital or residential care, as well as on an outpatient basis for patients with chronic conditions. Once patients with a nutritional risk are detected, they should undergo a more detailed nutritional assessment to identify and quantify the type and degree of malnutrition. This should include health history and clinical examination, dietary history, anthropometric measurements, evaluation of the degree of aggression determined by the disease, functional assessment, and, whenever possible, some method of measuring body composition.

          Related collections

          Most cited references204

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Sarcopenia: revised European consensus on definition and diagnosis

          Abstract Background in 2010, the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP) published a sarcopenia definition that aimed to foster advances in identifying and caring for people with sarcopenia. In early 2018, the Working Group met again (EWGSOP2) to update the original definition in order to reflect scientific and clinical evidence that has built over the last decade. This paper presents our updated findings. Objectives to increase consistency of research design, clinical diagnoses and ultimately, care for people with sarcopenia. Recommendations sarcopenia is a muscle disease (muscle failure) rooted in adverse muscle changes that accrue across a lifetime; sarcopenia is common among adults of older age but can also occur earlier in life. In this updated consensus paper on sarcopenia, EWGSOP2: (1) focuses on low muscle strength as a key characteristic of sarcopenia, uses detection of low muscle quantity and quality to confirm the sarcopenia diagnosis, and identifies poor physical performance as indicative of severe sarcopenia; (2) updates the clinical algorithm that can be used for sarcopenia case-finding, diagnosis and confirmation, and severity determination and (3) provides clear cut-off points for measurements of variables that identify and characterise sarcopenia. Conclusions EWGSOP2's updated recommendations aim to increase awareness of sarcopenia and its risk. With these new recommendations, EWGSOP2 calls for healthcare professionals who treat patients at risk for sarcopenia to take actions that will promote early detection and treatment. We also encourage more research in the field of sarcopenia in order to prevent or delay adverse health outcomes that incur a heavy burden for patients and healthcare systems.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Definition and classification of cancer cachexia: an international consensus.

            To develop a framework for the definition and classification of cancer cachexia a panel of experts participated in a formal consensus process, including focus groups and two Delphi rounds. Cancer cachexia was defined as a multifactorial syndrome defined by an ongoing loss of skeletal muscle mass (with or without loss of fat mass) that cannot be fully reversed by conventional nutritional support and leads to progressive functional impairment. Its pathophysiology is characterised by a negative protein and energy balance driven by a variable combination of reduced food intake and abnormal metabolism. The agreed diagnostic criterion for cachexia was weight loss greater than 5%, or weight loss greater than 2% in individuals already showing depletion according to current bodyweight and height (body-mass index [BMI] <20 kg/m(2)) or skeletal muscle mass (sarcopenia). An agreement was made that the cachexia syndrome can develop progressively through various stages--precachexia to cachexia to refractory cachexia. Severity can be classified according to degree of depletion of energy stores and body protein (BMI) in combination with degree of ongoing weight loss. Assessment for classification and clinical management should include the following domains: anorexia or reduced food intake, catabolic drive, muscle mass and strength, functional and psychosocial impairment. Consensus exists on a framework for the definition and classification of cancer cachexia. After validation, this should aid clinical trial design, development of practice guidelines, and, eventually, routine clinical management. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index: a new index for evaluating at-risk elderly medical patients.

              Patients at risk of malnutrition and related morbidity and mortality can be identified with the Nutritional Risk Index (NRI). However, this index remains limited for elderly patients because of difficulties in establishing their normal weight. Therefore, we replaced the usual weight in this formula by ideal weight according to the Lorentz formula (WLo), creating a new index called the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI). First, a prospective study enrolled 181 hospitalized elderly patients. Nutritional status [albumin, prealbumin, and body mass index (BMI)] and GNRI were assessed. GNRI correlated with a severity score taking into account complications (bedsores or infections) and 6-mo mortality. Second, the GNRI was measured prospectively in 2474 patients admitted to a geriatric rehabilitation care unit over a 3-y period. The severity score correlated with albumin and GNRI but not with BMI or weight:WLo. Risk of mortality (odds ratio) and risk of complications were, respectively, 29 (95% CI: 5.2, 161.4) and 4.4 (95% CI: 1.3, 14.9) for major nutrition-related risk (GNRI: <82), 6.6 (95% CI: 1.3, 33.0), 4.9 (95% CI: 1.9, 12.5) for moderate nutrition-related risk (GNRI: 82 to <92), and 5.6 (95% CI: 1.2, 26.6) and 3.3 (95% CI: 1.4, 8.0) for a low nutrition-related risk (GNRI: 92 to < or =98). Accordingly, 12.2%, 31.4%, 29.4%, and 27.0% of the 2474 patients had major, moderate, low, and no nutrition-related risk, respectively. GNRI is a simple and accurate tool for predicting the risk of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized elderly patients and should be recorded systematically on admission.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                NUTRHU
                Nutrients
                Nutrients
                MDPI AG
                2072-6643
                June 2022
                June 09 2022
                : 14
                : 12
                : 2392
                Article
                10.3390/nu14122392
                35745121
                fe1369d5-5e4b-4e10-9cd4-9652c6adb7b9
                © 2022

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article