Dataset Information

The Combined Usage of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition Criteria and Controlling Nutrition Status Score in Acute Care Hospitals.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) lacks reliable blood tests for evaluating the nutrition status. We retrospectively compared the GLIM criteria, Controlling Nutrition Status (CONUT) score, and Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) to establish effective malnutrition screening and provide appropriate nutritional interventions according to severity.

Methods

We classified 177 patients into 3 malnutrition categories (normal/mild, moderate, and severe) according to the GLIM criteria, CONUT score, and SGA. We investigated the malnutrition prevalence, concordance of malnutrition severity, predictability of clinical outcome, concordance by etiology, and clinical outcome by inflammation.

Results

The highest prevalence of malnutrition was found using the GLIM criteria (87.6%). Concordance of malnutrition severity was low between the GLIM criteria and CONUT score. Concordance by etiology was low in all groups but was the highest in the "acute disease" group. The area under the curve of clinical outcome and that of the "with inflammation group" were significantly higher when using the CONUT score versus using the other tools (0.679 and 0.683, respectively).

Conclusion

The GLIM criteria have high sensitivity, while the CONUT score can effectively predict the clinical outcome of malnutrition. Their combined use can efficiently screen for malnutrition and patient severity in acute care hospitals.

SUBMITTER: Mitani A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8619794 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: With the use of medicines being a broad and extensive part of health management, mechanisms to ensure quality use of medicines are essential. Drug usage evaluation (DUE) is an evidence-based quality improvement methodology, designed to improve the quality, safety and cost-effectiveness of drug use. The purpose of this paper is to describe a national DUE methodology used to improve health care delivery across the continuum through multi-faceted intervention involving audit and feedback, academic detailing and system change, and a qualitative assessment of the methodology, as illustrated by the Acute Postoperative Pain Management (APOP) project. METHODS: An established methodology, consisting of a baseline audit of inpatient medical records, structured patient interviews and general practitioner surveys, followed by an educational intervention and follow-up audit, is used. Australian hospitals, including private, public, metropolitan and regional, are invited to participate on a voluntary basis. De-identified data collected by hospitals are collated and evaluated nationally to provide descriptive comparative analyses. Hospitals benchmark their practices against state and national results to facilitate change. The educational intervention consists of academic detailing, group education, audit and feedback, point-of-prescribing prompts and system changes. A repeat data collection is undertaken to assess changes in practice.An online qualitative survey was undertaken to evaluate the APOP program. Qualitative assessment of hospitals' perceptions of the effectiveness of the overall DUE methodology and changes in procedure/prescribing/policy/clinical practice which resulted from participation were elicited. RESULTS: 62 hospitals participated in the APOP project. Among 23 respondents to the evaluation survey, 18 (78%) reported improvements in the documentation of pain scores at their hospital. 15 (65%) strongly agreed or agreed that participation in APOP directly resulted in increased prescribing of multimodal analgesia for pain relief in postoperative patients. CONCLUSIONS: This national DUE program has facilitated the engagement and participation of a number of acute health care facilities to address issues relating to quality use of medicine. This approach has been perceived to be effective in helping them achieve improvements in patient care.

Project description:Tackling childhood malnutrition is a global health priority. A key indicator is the estimated prevalence of malnutrition, measured by nutrition surveys. Most aspects of survey design are standardised, but data 'cleaning criteria' are not. These aim to exclude extreme values which may represent measurement or data-entry errors. The effect of different cleaning criteria on malnutrition prevalence estimates was unknown. We applied five commonly used data cleaning criteria (WHO 2006; EPI-Info; WHO 1995 fixed; WHO 1995 flexible; SMART) to 21 national Demographic and Health Survey datasets. These included a total of 163,228 children, aged 6-59 months. We focused on wasting (low weight-for-height), a key indicator for treatment programmes. Choice of cleaning criteria had a marked effect: SMART were least inclusive, resulting in the lowest reported malnutrition prevalence, while WHO 2006 were most inclusive, resulting in the highest. Across the 21 countries, the proportion of records excluded was 3 to 5 times greater when using SMART compared to WHO 2006 criteria, resulting in differences in the estimated prevalence of total wasting of between 0.5 and 3.8%, and differences in severe wasting of 0.4-3.9%. The magnitude of difference was associated with the standard deviation of the survey sample, a statistic that can reflect both population heterogeneity and data quality. Using these results to estimate case-loads for treatment programmes resulted in large differences for all countries. Wasting prevalence and caseload estimations are strongly influenced by choice of cleaning criterion. Because key policy and programming decisions depend on these statistics, variations in analytical practice could lead to inconsistent and potentially inappropriate implementation of malnutrition treatment programmes. We therefore call for mandatory reporting of cleaning criteria use so that results can be compared and interpreted appropriately. International consensus is urgently needed regarding choice of criteria to improve the comparability of nutrition survey data.

Project description:AimsWe aimed to investigate the prognostic impact of malnutrition, defined by the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria, stratified by renal function in hospitalized patients with acute decompensated heart failure (HF).Methods and resultsIn this retrospective study, 314 patients who were hospitalized for acute decompensated HF from August 2019 to October 2020 were enrolled. We evaluated malnutrition using the GLIM criteria during the time of admission. The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality. The median patient age was 82 years, and 90-day mortality was 14.0%. In total, 76 (24.2%) patients were malnourished according to the GLIM criteria. Malnutrition defined by the GLIM criteria [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.91, P = 0.036] and renal insufficiency [adjusted HR 2.59, 95% CI 1.07-6.28, P = 0.035 for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 vs. ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2 ] were identified as independent predictors of 90-day mortality after adjustment for age, systolic blood pressure, and serum sodium level. In the combined setting of both variables, patients with malnutrition and eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 had a markedly higher risk of 90-day mortality compared with those without malnutrition and eGFR ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (adjusted HR 3.92, 95% CI 1.10-13.9, P = 0.035). Adding both eGFR and malnutrition, defined by the GLIM criteria, to the baseline model with established risk factors improved both net reclassification and integrated discrimination greater than that of the baseline model (0.606, P < 0.001 and 0.050, P = 0.002, respectively), even when compared with the model with malnutrition by the GLIM alone (0.463, P = 0.002 and 0.034, P < 0.001, respectively).ConclusionsNutrition screening using the GLIM criteria stratified by renal function could clearly predict 90-day mortality in hospitalized patients with acute decompensated HF.

Project description:Clinical leadership is recognized as a crucial element in health system strengthening and health policy globally yet it has received relatively little attention in low and middle income countries (LMICs). Moreover, analyses of clinical leadership tend to focus on senior-level individual leaders, overlooking a wider constellation of middle-level leaders delivering health care in practice in a way affected by their health care context. Using the theoretical lens of 'distributed leadership', this article examines how middle-level leadership is practised and affected by context in Kenyan county hospitals, providing insights relevant to health care in other LMICs. The article is based on empirical qualitative case studies of clinical departmental leadership in two Kenyan public hospitals, drawing on data gathered through ethnographic observation, interviews and focus groups. We inductively and iteratively coded, analysed and theorized our findings. We found the distributed leadership lens useful for the purpose of analysing middle-level leadership in Kenyan hospitals, although clinical departmental leadership was understood locally in more individualized terms. Our distributed lens revealed medical and nursing leadership occurring in parallel and how only doctors in leadership roles were able to directly influence behaviour among their medical colleagues, using inter-personal skills, power and professional expertize. Finally, we found that Kenyan hospital contexts were characterized by cultures, norms and structures that constrained the way leadership was practiced. We make a theoretical contribution by demonstrating the utility of using distributed leadership as a lens for analysing leadership in LIMC health care contexts, revealing how context, power and inter-professional relationships moderate individual leaders' ability to bring about change. Our findings, have important implications for how leadership is conceptualized and the way leadership development and training are provided in LMICs health systems.

Project description:BackgroundOne in four adults are estimated to be at medium to high risk of malnutrition when screened using the 'Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool' upon admission to hospital in the United Kingdom. The Need for Nutrition Education/Education Programme (NNEdPro) Group was developed to address this issue and the Nutrition Education and Leadership for Improved Clinical Outcomes (NELICO) is a project within this group.The objective of NELICO was to assess whether an intensive training intervention combining clinical and public health nutrition, organisational management and leadership strategies, could equip junior doctors to contribute to improvement in nutrition awareness among healthcare professionals in the National Health Service in England.MethodsThree junior doctors were self-selected from the NNEdPro Group original training. Each junior doctor recruited three additional team members to attend an intensive training weekend incorporating nutrition, change management and leadership. This equipped them to run nutrition awareness weeks in their respective hospitals. Knowledge, attitudes and practices were evaluated at baseline as well as one and four months post-training as a quality assurance measure. The number and type of educational events held, pre-awareness week Online Hospital Survey results, attendance and qualitative feedback from training sessions, effectiveness of dissemination methods such as awareness stalls, Hospital Nutrition Attitude Survey results and overall feedback were also used to determine impact.ResultsWhen the weighted average score for knowledge, attitudes and practices at baseline was compared with four months post-intervention scores, there was a significant increase in the overall score (p = 0.03). All three hospital teams conducted an effective nutrition awareness week, as determined by qualitative data collected from interviews and feedback from educational sessions.ConclusionThe NELICO project and its resulting nutrition awareness weeks were considered innovative in terms of concept and content. It was considered useful, both for the junior doctors who showed improvement in their nutrition knowledge and reported enthusiasm and for the hospital setting, increasing awareness of clinical and public health nutrition among healthcare professionals. The NELICO project is one innovative method to promote nutrition awareness in tomorrow's doctors and shows they have the enthusiasm and drive to be nutrition champions.