Dataset Information

Nutritional Risk Screening Tools for Older Adults with COVID-19: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: 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.

SUBMITTER: Silva DFO

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7599513 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Nutritional Risk Screening Tools for Older Adults with COVID-19: A Systematic Review.

Silva David Franciole Oliveira DFO Lima Severina Carla Vieira Cunha SCVC Sena-Evangelista Karine Cavalcanti Mauricio KCM Marchioni Dirce Maria DM Cobucci Ricardo Ney RN Andrade Fábia Barbosa de FB

Nutrients 20200927 10

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 nutr ...[more]

PMID: 32992538

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFrailty is a geriatric syndrome that affects multiple domains of human functioning. A variety of problems contributes to the development of this syndrome; poor nutritional status is an important determinant of this condition. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine recent evidence regarding the association between nutritional status and frailty syndrome in older adults.MethodsPubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus electronic databases were searched using specific key words, for observational papers that were published during the period from 2005 to February 2017 and that studied the association or relationship between nutritional status and frailty in older adults. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement was followed to assess the quality of the included articles.ResultsOf the 2042 studies found, nineteen met the inclusion criteria. Of these studies, five provided data on micronutrients and frailty, and reported that frailty syndrome is associated with low intakes of specific micronutrients. Five studies provided data on macronutrients and frailty, and among those studies, four revealed that a higher protein intake was associated with a lower risk of frailty. Three studies examined the relationship between diet quality and frailty, and showed that the quality of the diet is inversely associated with the risk of being frail. Two studies provided data on the antioxidant capacity of the diet and frailty, and reported that a high dietary antioxidant capacity is associated with a lower risk of developing frailty. Finally, seven studies evaluated the relationship between scores on both the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) and the MNA-SF (Short Form) and frailty, and revealed an association between malnutrition and/or the risk of malnutrition and frailty.ConclusionsThis systematic review confirms the importance of both quantitative (energy intake) and qualitative (nutrient quality) factors of nutrition in the development of frailty syndrome in older adults. However, more longitudinal studies on this topic are required to further understand the potential role of nutrition in the prevention, postponement, or even reversion of frailty syndrome.

Project description:BackgroundStudies have reported an increase in the prevalence of depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. The accuracy of screening tools may change with the prevalence and distribution of a disease in a population or sample: the "Spectrum Effect".MethodsFirst, we selected commonly used screening tools and developed search strategies for the inclusion of original studies during the pandemic. Second, we searched PsycINFO, EMBASE, and MEDLINE from March 2020 to September 2022 to obtain original studies that investigated the accuracy of depression screening tools during the pandemic. We then searched these databases to identify meta-analyses summarizing the accuracy of these tools conducted before the pandemic and compared the optimal cut-offs for depression screening tools during the pandemic with those before.ResultFour original studies evaluating the optimal cut-offs for four screening tools (Beck Depression Inventory [BDI-II], Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Depression [HADS-D], Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9], and Geriatric Depression Scale-4 [GDS-4]) were published during the pandemic. Four meta-analyses summarizing these tools before the pandemic. We found that the optimal cut-off of BDI-II was 14 during the pandemic (23.8% depression prevalence, screening patients with Type 2 diabetes) and 14.5 before the pandemic (17.6% depression prevalence, screening psychiatric, primary care, and healthy populations); HADS-D was 10 during the pandemic (23.8% depression prevalence, screening patients with type 2 diabetes) and 7 before the pandemic (15.0% depression prevalence, screening medically ill patients); PHQ-9 was 11 during the pandemic (14.5% depression prevalence, screening university students) and 8 before the pandemic (10.9% depression prevalence, screening the unrestricted population), and GDS-4 was 1.8 during the pandemic (29.0% depression prevalence, screening adults seen in a memory clinic setting) and 3 before the pandemic (18.5% depression prevalence, screening older adults).ConclusionThe optimal cut-off for different screening tools may be sensitive to changes in study populations and reference standards. And potential spectrum effects that should be considered in post-COVID time which aiming to improve diagnostic accuracy.

Project description:IntroductionDepression is a common mental disorder and is a major cause of years lived with disability. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused an increase in the prevalence of depression worldwide. Our aim is to identify and synthesise the determinants of depression, the diagnostic assessment tools used to evaluate depression, and the interventions carried out since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in the population aged 60 and older.Methods and analysisA systematic review of the literature will be conducted. The following databases will be searched: CINAHL Plus with Full Text, MedicLatina, MEDLINE with Full Text, and Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection. The search strategy will include the following Medical Subject Headings or similar terms: "Depression", "Depressive Disorder", "Depressive Symptoms", "Older Adults", "Aging", "Elderly", Pandemic" and "COVID-19". Two independent reviewers will ascertain whether the resulting articles meet inclusion and exclusion criteria, and perform the analysis of data quality. Disagreements will be resolved by a third reviewer. All studies reported between December 2019 and March 2022 meeting the following criteria will be included: studies in adults aged 60 and over, and articles written in English, Portuguese, Spanish or German. Information on determinants of depression, assessment instruments used to assess depressive symptoms and/or interventions to decrease depression are reported. Studies will not be excluded based on geographical area study context (eg, community, culture or specific environment). All studies related to diagnostic assessment, care planning and/or intervention strategies specifically for older adults with depression will be included.Ethics and disseminationAs only secondary data will be analysed, no ethical approval is required for this study. This scientific article is a systematic review protocol for which data have not yet been extracted or analysed. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications.Prospero registration numberCRD42022299775.

Project description:BackgroundHomelessness is increasing globally. It results in poorer physical and mental health than age matched people living in permanent housing. Better information on the health needs of people experiencing homelessness is needed to inform effective resourcing, planning and service delivery by government and care organisations. The aim of this review was to identify assessment tools that are valid, reliable and appropriate to measure the health status of people who are homeless.MethodsData sources: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed (and Medline), PsychInfo, Scopus, CINAHL and ERIC from database inception until September 2018. Key words used were homeless, homelessness, homeless persons, vagrancy, health status, health, health issues, health assessment and health screening. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO. The National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC) hierarchy of evidence was applied; methodological quality of included articles was assessed using the McMaster critical appraisal tools and psychometric properties of the tools were appraised using the International Centre for Allied Health Evidence Ready Reckoner.ResultsDiverse tools and measures (N = 71) were administered within, and across the reviewed studies (N = 37), with the main focus being on general health, oral health and nutrition. Eleven assessment tools in 13 studies had evidence of appropriate psychometric testing for the target population in domains of quality of life and health status, injury, substance use, mental health, psychological and cognitive function. Methodological quality of articles and tools were assessed as moderate to good. No validated tools were identified to assess oral health, chronic conditions, anthropometry, demography, nutrition, continence, functional decline and frailty, or vision and hearing. However, assessments of physical constructs (such as oral health, anthropometry, vision and hearing) could be applied to homeless people on a presumption of validity, because the constructs would be measured with clinical indicators in the same manner as people living in permanent dwellings.ConclusionsThis review highlighted the need to develop consistent and comprehensive health assessment tools validated with, and tailored for, adults experiencing homelessness.

Dataset Information

Nutritional Risk Screening Tools for Older Adults with COVID-19: A Systematic Review.

Publications

Nutritional Risk Screening Tools for Older Adults with COVID-19: A Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets