Agreement between Graz Malnutrition Screening (GMS) with subjective nutritional assessment instruments in hospitalized patients

Lima, Emanuella Mardegani Batista; Almeida, Betullya Lucas; Gomes, Hanna Barbosa; Bartochevis, Janine Alexandre Borges; Toniato, Tatiana Salgado; Lazzarini, Thailiny Ricatti; Pereira, Taísa Sabrina Silva; Guandalini, Valdete Regina

doi:10.20960/nh.1853

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The prevalence of malnutrition in patients with cancer is described by 26-42% [7][8][9], and varies between different operationalisations [10][11][12]. To better reflect the health status of an older patient before treatment decisions are made by oncologists, a (comprehensive) geriatric assessment is recommended [13][14][15], consisting of several domains such as functional status, cognition, comorbidity or polypharmacy and it is also recommended that it should contain a domain regarding the patients' nutritional status assessed by validated tools such as the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA)® [15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nutritional status according to the mini nutritional assessment (MNA)® as potential prognostic factor for health and treatment outcomes in patients with cancer – a systematic review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Patients with cancer have an increased risk of malnutrition which is associated with poor outcome. The Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA®) is often used in older patients with cancer but its relation to outcome is not known. Methods Four databases were systematically searched for studies relating MNA-results with any reported outcome. Two reviewers screened titles/abstracts and full-texts, extracted data and rated the risk of bias (RoB) independently. Results We included 56 studies which varied widely in patient and study characteristics. In multivariable analyses, (risk of) malnutrition assessed by MNA significantly predicts a higher chance for mortality/poor overall survival (22/27 studies), shorter progression-free survival/time to progression (3/5 studies), treatment maintenance (5/8 studies) and (health-related) quality of life (2/2 studies), but not treatment toxicity/complications (1/7 studies) or functional status/decline in (1/3 studies). For other outcomes – length of hospital stay (2 studies), falls, fatigue and unplanned (hospital) admissions (1 study each) – no adjusted results were reported. RoB was rated as moderate to high. Conclusions MNA®-result predicts mortality/survival, cancer progression, treatment maintenance and (health-related) quality of life and did not predict adverse treatment outcomes and functional status/ decline in patients with cancer. For other outcomes results are less clear. The moderate to high RoB calls for studies with better control of potential confounders.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nutritional status according to the mini nutritional assessment (MNA)® as potential prognostic factor for health and treatment outcomes in patients with cancer – a systematic review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The GMS score was inversely correlated with the MNA-SF score (r = −0.674, P < 0.001) and positively correlated with the PG-SGA score (r = 0.776, P < 0.001). 46 In this study, based on logistic regression models, the correct classification rate of GMS in the general hospital population was 74.10%, sensitivity was 76.90%, and specificity was 71.10%. When these values are analyzed, it can be seen that GMS is a successful screening tool in identifying malnutrition for adult and older patients in a hospital setting.…”

Section: F I G U R E 3 Receiver Operating Characteristic (Roc) Curve ...mentioning

confidence: 67%

“…When MNA‐SF was taken as a reference, the sensitivity of GMS was 86.0%, its specificity was 75.0%, the PPV was 88.0%, and the NPV was 71.0%. The GMS score was inversely correlated with the MNA‐SF score ( r = −0.674, P < 0.001) and positively correlated with the PG‐SGA score ( r = 0.776, P < 0.001) 46 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity of the Graz Malnutrition Screening as an indicator of malnutrition in hospitalized patients

Şahin

Tek

2022

Nut in Clin Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Hospital malnutrition is an important health problem for developed and developing countries, and screening tools are recommended in practice because they can be obtained quickly and easily to identify the risk of malnutrition. This study aimed to validate the use of the Graz Malnutrition Screening (GMS) in combination with different methods of nutrition assessment in the identification of malnutrition risk in hospitalized adult and older patients. Methods:The study was performed with a total of 348 adult (64.4%) and older (35.6%) patients treated in the internal and surgical clinical units of Ankara Gazi Hospital between May and July 2019. A questionnaire including general information, anthropometric measurements, and biochemical parameters was applied.The Nutritional Risk Screening-2002 (NRS-2002, Short Nutritional Assessment Questionnaire (SNAQ), and GMS were applied, and results were evaluated by comparison. Results:The mean age of the patients was 57.0 years, and the mean hospital length of stay (LOS) was 7.9 days. According to GMS, malnutrition risk was found in 47.7% of the patients. When NRS-2002 was taken as a reference, the sensitivity and specificity of GMS were calculated as 95.16% and 78.57%, respectively, and Cohen's kappa coefficient was 0.686. When SNAQ was taken as a reference, the sensitivity and specificity of GMS were calculated as 91.59% and 75.11%, respectively, and Cohen's kappa coefficient was 0.609. Conclusion:GMS can be used as a valid screening tool to identify malnutrition risk in both adult and older patients in the different hospital departments in Turkey.

show abstract

Nutritional Assessment in Older Adults: MNA® 25 years of a Screening Tool & a Reference Standard for Care and Research; What Next?

Guigoz

Vellas

2021

The Journal of nutrition, health and aging

118

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A tool to assess nutritional status in older persons was really needed. It took 5 years to design the MNA® (Mini Nutrition Assessment) tool, complete the first validations studies both in Europe and in the U.S. and to publish it. After the full MNA®, the MNA® short form and the self-MNA® have been validated. As well as Chinese and other national MNA® forms. Now more than 2000 clinical research have used the MNA® all over the world from community care to hospital. At least 22 Expert groups included the MNA® in new clinical practice guidelines, national or international registries. The MNA® is presently included in almost all geriatric and nutrition textbook and part of the teaching program for medicine and other health care professional worldwide. The urgent need is to target the frail older adults more likely to have weight loss and poor appetite and to prevent frailty and weight loss in the robust. We present in this paper the review of 30 years of clinical research and practice using the MNA® worldwide.

show abstract

Agreement between Graz Malnutrition Screening (GMS) with subjective nutritional assessment instruments in hospitalized patients

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Nutritional status according to the mini nutritional assessment (MNA)® as potential prognostic factor for health and treatment outcomes in patients with cancer – a systematic review

Nutritional status according to the mini nutritional assessment (MNA)® as potential prognostic factor for health and treatment outcomes in patients with cancer – a systematic review

Validity of the Graz Malnutrition Screening as an indicator of malnutrition in hospitalized patients

Nutritional Assessment in Older Adults: MNA® 25 years of a Screening Tool & a Reference Standard for Care and Research; What Next?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About