Assessment of Two Nutritional Screening Tools in Hospitalized Children.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Aim
to evaluate validity and concordance of Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition in Pediatrics (STAMP) and Screening Tool for Risk On Nutritional status and Growth (STRONGkids) screening tools for assessment of nutritional risk in pediatric inpatients.Methods
Prospective longitudinal observational multicenter study in children aged 1 month or older admitted as inpatients. Weight, height, cause of admission, demographic data, length of stay, and nutritional interventions were recorded. STAMP and STRONGkids were applied within the first 72 h of admission. Anthropometric measurements were recorded again 12-18 months after admission.Results
Eighty-one patients with median age of 4.1 years completed the study. Agreement between tools was moderate (κ = 0.47). STAMP had a greater tendency to classify patients as high risk (12.3% vs. 2.5%). Both tools showed very weak correlation with height for age. All undernourished patients at the beginning and the end of the study were classified as medium or high risk by STAMP and STRONGkids (100% sensitivity), although specificity was below 50% in all cases. There were no differences in length of stay based on nutritional risk with any of the tools.Conclusions
STAMP and STRONGkids demonstrated moderate agreement, with high sensitivity but low specificity for the diagnosis of undernutrition. Further studies are required to analyze cost-effectiveness of these tools and nutritional interventions derived from them.
SUBMITTER: Perez-Solis D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7281986 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Nutritional risk screening (NRS) is not yet established in many clinical settings. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of two NRS tools; the Paediatric Yorkhill Malnutrition Score (PYMS) and the Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition in Paediatrics (STAMP), compared to the global dietitians' clinical judgment. The goal of this study was also to estimate the prevalence of nutritional risk in Greek paediatric patients. Overall, 1506 children, 1-16 years, from paediatric and surgical wards of two Greek hospitals were included. NRS was performed using PYMS and STAMP based either on World Health Organization (WHOGC) or Hellenic growth charts (HGC). The first 907 children were also referred to dietitians who categorized children in low, medium and high nutritional risk according to their global clinical judgment. PYMS, either based on WHOGC or HGC, showed better agreement with dietitians' feedback (kPYMS_WHO = 0.47; 95%CI: 0.41-0.52, kPYMS_HGC = 0.48; 95%CI: 0.43-0.53) compared to STAMP (kSTAMP_WHO = 0.28; 95%CI: 0.23-0.33, kSTAMP_HGC = 0.26; 95%CI: 0.21-0.32). PYMS also showed the best diagnostic accuracy compared to STAMP in paediatrics and surgical wards separately. Moreover, the PYMS showed similar sensitivity to the STAMP (WHOGC: 82% vs. 84.4%), but a higher positive predictive value (WHOGC: 58.2 vs. 38.7). Using PYMS, high and medium malnutrition risk was observed at 14.9%, and 13.1% of children, respectively. Almost 28% of hospitalised children were at nutritional risk. Children in hospitals should be screened with effective and feasible NRS tools such as PYMS.
| S-EPMC8069022 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with high risk of malnutrition, primarily in older people; assessing nutritional risk using appropriate screening tools is critical. This systematic review identified applicable tools and assessed their measurement properties. Literature was searched in the MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS databases. Four studies conducted in China met the eligibility criteria. Sample sizes ranged from six to 182, and participants' ages from 65 to 87 years. Seven nutritional screening and assessment tools were used: the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002), the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), the MNA-short form (MNA-sf), the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), the Nutritional Risk Index (NRI), the Geriatric NRI (GNRI), and modified Nutrition Risk in the Critically ill (mNUTRIC) score. Nutritional risk was identified in 27.5% to 100% of participants. The NRS-2002, MNA, MNA-sf, NRI, and MUST demonstrated high sensitivity; the MUST had better specificity. The MNA and MUST demonstrated better criterion validity. The MNA-sf demonstrated better predictive validity for poor appetite and weight loss; the NRS-2002 demonstrated better predictive validity for prolonged hospitalization. mNUTRIC score demonstrated good predictive validity for hospital mortality. Most instruments demonstrate high sensitivity for identifying nutritional risk, but none are acknowledged as the best for nutritional screening in older adults with COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7599513 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The mouse clinical frailty index and the mouse frailty phenotype assessment are two recently developed tools used to assess frailty in mice. The objectives of this study were to investigate whether the same mice are identified as frail with both tools and to examine the association of each of the assessment tools with age and frailty-related outcomes. Frailty was measured using both tools in old (~24 months; n = 36) C57BL/6 male mice. After 2 weeks, blood pressure and heart rate were measured and serum samples were collected for analysis of alanine aminotransferase, creatinine, and albumin levels. The mouse frailty phenotype assessment identified no mice as frail but modification of the assessment tool identified six mice as frail. The mouse clinical frailty index identified 16 mice as frail and the agreement between the two scales was 50.0%. Increasing clinical frailty index scores were correlated with low serum alanine aminotransferase, as well as decreased heart rate, and reduced heart rate variance. We conclude that, consistent with equivalent frailty assessment scales in humans, both tools have value but do not necessarily identify the same mice as frail.
| S-EPMC5861875 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of the present study was to identify all currently available screening and assessment tools for detection of malnutrition in hospitalised children, and to identify the most useful tools on the basis of published validation studies.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesPubMed, CINAHL and MEDLINE were searched up to October 2017.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesStudies in English that reported sensitivity, specificity and positive/negative predictive values (PPVs/NPVs) in the paediatric population were eligible for inclusion.Data extraction and synthesisTwo authors independently screened all of the studies identified, and extracted the data. The methodological qualities of the studies included were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool.ResultsThe 26 validation studies that met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review used eight screening and three assessment tools. The number of participants varied from 32 to 14 477. There was considerable variability in the chosen reference standards, which prevented direct comparisons of the predictive performances of the tools. Anthropometric measurements were used as reference standards in 16 of the identified studies, and full nutritional assessment in 5. The Pediatric Yorkhill Malnutrition Score (PYMS) screening tool performed better than Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition and Screening Tool for Risk On Nutritional status and Growth when compared in terms of anthropometric measurements, especially for body mass index (Se=90.9, Sp=81.9) and triceps skinfold thickness (Se=80.0, Sp=75.0). However, low PPVs indicated the problem of overprediction of positive cases, which was typical for all of the studies that used anthropometric measurements as the reference standard.ConclusionsThis systematic review identifies the need for definition of the gold standard for validation of screening tools. Anthropometry measurements using WHO or Centers for Disease Control and Prevention growth charts should be considered as the possible reference standard in future validation studies. We would recommend the use of PYMS for hospitalised paediatric patients without chronic conditions, in combination with full nutritional assessment.Prospero registration numberCRD42017077477.
| S-EPMC6549612 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSymptoms of anxiety are often unrecognized and untreated in dialysis patients. We investigated the diagnostic accuracy of two widely used screening tools for anxiety in hemodialysis patients.MethodsFor this cross-sectional validation study, chronic hemodialysis patients from eight dialysis centers in the Netherlands were included. The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Anxiety subscale (HADS-A) were validated by the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Inventory (MINI) diagnostic interview. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to determine the optimal cut-off values.ResultsOf 65 participants, 13 (20%) were diagnosed with one or more anxiety disorders on the MINI, of which 5 were included in the analysis. ROC curves showed a good diagnostic accuracy of the BAI and HADS-A. The optimal cut-off value for the BAI was ≥13 (sensitivity 100%, specificity 85%) and for the HADS-A was ≥10 (sensitivity 80%, specificity 100%).ConclusionsBased on our limited data, both the BAI and the HADS-A seem to be valid screening instruments for anxiety in hemodialysis patients that can be used in routine dialysis care. The HADS-A consists of fewer items and showed fewer false-positive results than the BAI, which might make it more useful in clinical practice.
| S-EPMC9318791 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Nutrition risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002) and Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) are widely used screening tools but have not been compared in a Chinese population. We conducted secondary data analysis of a cross-sectional study which included 332 hospitalized gastrointestinal disease patients, collected by the Gastrointestinal department of Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH) in 2008. Results of NRS-2002 and SGA screening tools, complications, length of stay (LOS), cost, and death were measured. The agreement between the tools was assessed via Kappa (κ) statistics. The performance of NRS-2002 and SGA in predicting LOS and cost was assessed via linear regression. The complications and death prediction of tools was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. NRS-2002 and SGA identified nutrition risk at 59.0% and 45.2% respectively. Moderate agreement (κ >0.50) between the two tools was found among all age groups except individuals aged ≤ 20, which only slight agreement was found (κ = 0.087). NRS-2002 (R square 0.130) and SGA (R square 0.140) did not perform differently in LOS prediction. The cost prediction of NRS-2002 (R square 0.198) and SGA (R square 0.190) were not significantly different. There was no difference between NRS-2002 (infectious complications: area under ROC (AUROC) = 0.615, death: AUROC = 0.810) and SGA (infectious complications: AUROC = 0.600, death: AUROC = 0.846) in predicting infectious complication and death, but NRS-2002 (0.738) seemed to perform better than SGA (0.552) in predicting non-infectious complications. The risk of malnutrition among patients was high. NRS-2002 and SGA have similar capacity to predict LOS, cost, infectious complications and death, but NRS-2002 performed better in predicting non-infectious complications.
| S-EPMC4973995 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Disease-related malnutrition is a common challenge among hospitalized patients. There seems to be a lack of an effective system to follow-up nutritional monitoring and treatment of patients at nutritional risk after risk assessment. We identify a need for a more standardized system to prevent and treat disease-related malnutrition.We aimed to develop a dietary assessment app for tablets for use in a hospital setting and to evaluate the app's ability to measure individual intake of energy, protein, liquid, and food and beverage items among hospitalized patients for two days. We also aimed to measure patients' experiences using the app.We have developed the MyFood app, which consists of three modules: 1) collection of information about the patient, 2) dietary assessment function, and 3) evaluation of recorded intake compared to individual needs. We used observations from digital photography of the meals, combined with partial weighing of the meal components, as a reference method to evaluate the app's dietary assessment system for two days. Differences in the intake estimations of energy, protein, liquid, and food and beverage items between MyFood and the photograph method were analyzed on both group and individual level.Thirty-two patients hospitalized at Oslo University Hospital were included in the study. The data collection period ran from March to May 2017. About half of the patients had ≥90% agreement between MyFood and the photograph method for energy, protein, and liquid intake on both recording days. Dinner was the meal with the lowest percent agreement between methods. MyFood overestimated patients' intake of bread and cereals and underestimated fruit consumption. Agreement between methods increased from day 1 to day 2 for bread and cereals, spreads, egg, yogurt, soup, hot dishes, and desserts. Ninety percent of participants reported that MyFood was easy to use, and 97% found the app easy to navigate.We developed the MyFood app as a tool to monitor dietary intake among hospitalized patients at nutritional risk. The recorded intake of energy, protein, and liquid using MyFood showed good agreement with the photograph method for the majority of participants. The app's ability to estimate intake within food groups was good, except for bread and cereals which were overestimated and fruits which were underestimated. The app was well accepted among study participants and has the potential to be a dietary assessment tool for use among patients in clinical practice.
| S-EPMC6231855 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background/objectivesTo evaluate the nutritional status and prevalence of malnutrition in hospitalized children at admission and during hospitalization in South Korea.Subjects/methodsThis first cross-sectional nationwide "Pediatric Nutrition Day (pNday)" survey was conducted among 872 hospitalized children (504 boys, 368 girls; 686 medical, 186 surgical) from 23 hospitals in South Korea. Malnutrition risk was screened using the Pediatric Yorkhill Malnutrition Score (PYMS) and the Screening Tool Risk on Nutritional status and Growth. Nutritional status was assessed by z-scores of weight-for-age for underweight, weight-for-height for wasting, and height-for-age for stunting as well as laboratory tests.ResultsAt admission, of the 872 hospitalized children, 17.2% were underweight, and the prevalence of wasting and stunting was 20.2% and 17.3%, respectively. During hospitalization till pNday, 10.8% and 19.6% experienced weight loss and decreased oral intake, respectively. During the aforementioned period, fasting was more prevalent in surgical patients (7.5%) than in medical patients (1.6%) (P < 0.001). According to the PYMS, 34.3% and 30% of the children at admission and on pNday, respectively, had a high-risk of malnutrition, requiring consultation with the nutritional support team (NST). However, only 4% were actually referred to the NST during hospitalization.ConclusionsMalnutrition was prevalent at admission and during hospitalization in pediatric patients, with many children experiencing weight loss and poor oral intake. To improve the nutritional status of hospitalized children, it is important to screen and identify all children at risk of malnutrition and refer malnourished patients to the multidisciplinary NST for proper nutritional interventions.
| S-EPMC8007407 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe aims of this study were to assess malnutrition risk in Chinese geriatric inpatients using Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS2002) and Mini-Nutritional Assessment (MNA), and to identify the most appropriate nutritional screening tool for these patients.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingEight medical centres in Hubei Province, China.ParticipantsA total of 425 inpatients aged ≥70 years were consecutively recruited between December 2014 and May 2016.Primary and secondary outcome measuresNutritional risk was assessed using NRS2002, MNA, anthropometric measurements and biochemical parameters within 24 hours of admission. Comorbidities and length of hospitalisation were recorded. Nutritional parameters, body mass index (BMI) and length of hospital stay (LOS) were employed to compare MNA and NRS2002. Kappa analysis was used to evaluate the consistency of the two tools.ResultsThe average age was 81.2±5.9 years (range, 70-98). The prevalence of undernutrition classified by NRS2002 and MNA was 40.9% and 58.6%, respectively. Patients undergoing malnutrition had lower BMI, haemoglobin, albumin and prealbumin (p<0.05), and longer LOS (p<0.05). The NRS2002 showed moderate agreement (κ=0.521, p<0.001) with MNA. Both tools presented significant correlation with age, BMI and laboratory parameters (p<0.001). In addition, a significant association between both tools and LOS was found (p<0.05). In addition, the NRS2002 was not different from MNA in predicting nutritional risk in terms of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (p>0.05).ConclusionsThe results show a relatively high prevalence of malnutrition risk in our sample cohort. We found that NRS2002 and MNA were both suitable in screening malnutrition risk among Chinese geriatric inpatients.
| S-EPMC6411257 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundShared decision making (SDM) preceding lung cancer screening is important for populations that are underrepresented in lung cancer screening trials. Current evidence-based guidelines; however, do not address personal risk and outcomes in underrepresented populations. This study compared two SDM decision aids (Option Grids and Shouldiscreen.com) for SDM efficacy, decision regret and knowledge.MethodsWe conducted a prospective trial of lung cancer screening patients (N = 237) randomized to SDM with Option Grids or Shouldiscreen.com. To evaluate the SDM process after lung cancer screening, patients answered two questionnaires: CollaboRATE and Decision Regret. Patients also completed a questionnaire to test their knowledge of lung cancer screening.ResultsPatients were predominantly African American (61.6%), though multiple races, varying education levels and equal genders were represented. Patients in both Option Grids and Shouldiscreen.com groups reported favorable SDM experiences (P = 0.60) and equivalent knowledge about lung cancer screening (P = 0.43). Patients using Shouldiscreen.com had less knowledge regarding the potential complications of subsequent testing (P = 0.02). Shouldiscreen.com patients had increased regret regarding their decision to pursue screening (P = 0.02).ConclusionsOption Grids and Shouldiscreen.com both facilitated a meaningful SDM process. However, Option Grids patients experienced decreased decision regret and enhanced knowledge of the potential complications of screening.
| S-EPMC8458019 | biostudies-literature