Nutritional Risk Screening 2002, Short Nutritional Assessment Questionnaire, Malnutrition Screening Tool, and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool Are Good Predictors of Nutrition Risk in an Emergency Service

Rabito, Estela Iraci; Marcadenti, Aline; Fink, Jaqueline da Silva; Figueira, Luciane; Silva, Flávia Moraes

doi:10.1177/0884533617692527

Cited by 74 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, in studies carried out by Burgos et al 12 , Gobbardo and Boscaini 38 and Rabito et al 39 nutritional risk was observed in only, 28.9%, 14.8% and 29.3% of the patients, respectively.…”

Section: Weight Loss In the Last 3 Months Reduction Of Food Intake Inmentioning

confidence: 86%

Comparação dos critérios da nrs-2002 com o risco nutricional em pacientes hospitalizados

Barbosa

Vicentini

Langa

2019

Ciênc. saúde coletiva

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resumo A triagem “Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS-2002)” é uma ferramenta considerada padrão ouro na análise do risco nutricional. Sendo assim, objetivou-se identificar na “NRS-2002” qual ou quais os critérios avaliados que mais contribuem para determinar o risco nutricional. Estudo descritivo transversal e quantitativo com 763 adultos e idosos hospitalizados, no ano de 2015. Aplicada a “NRS-2002” que avalia as variáveis Índice de Massa Corporal (IMC), perda de peso nos últimos 3 meses, redução da ingestão alimentar na última semana e gravidade da doença. A estatística dos dados foi descritiva e analítica por meio do método de regressão logística univariada. Observou-se que 46,4% dos pacientes apresentaram risco nutricional, com maiores chances em homens e idosos. Sendo a perda de peso o critério mais prevalente seguido da redução da ingestão alimentar, o IMC < 20,5kg/m² teve maior efeito no risco nutricional (OR = 31,0; IC 95%:14,21;67,44). Concluiu-se que o IMC < 20,5kg/m² e a perda de peso nos últimos três meses foram os fatores que mais contribuíram na determinação do risco nutricional, sendo a identificação precoce do risco nutricional de extrema importância para o direcionamento da conduta dietoterápica para a melhora da ingestão alimentar com objetivo de recuperação do peso corporal.

show abstract

Section: Weight Loss In the Last 3 Months Reduction Of Food Intake Inmentioning

confidence: 86%

Comparação dos critérios da nrs-2002 com o risco nutricional em pacientes hospitalizados

Barbosa

Vicentini

Langa

2019

Ciênc. saúde coletiva

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a recent study evaluating the ability of tools to identify malnutrition based on the new ESPEN criteria, the MUST performed better than the NRS 2002, with higher sensitivity and specificity . In another study, Rabito et al compared the accuracy of 3 screening tools against NRS 2002 to identify patients at risk of malnutrition and the ability to predict morbidity and mortality. The authors found that the relative frequency of patients at nutrition risk differed between the screening tools, that MUST had the highest sensitivity and specificity, but that all tools showed moderate agreement and a satisfactory performance to identify patients at nutrition risk.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The authors found that the relative frequency of patients at nutrition risk differed between the screening tools, that MUST had the highest sensitivity and specificity, but that all tools showed moderate agreement and a satisfactory performance to identify patients at nutrition risk. In their final adjusted univariate analysis, a significant association between nutrition risk and death was observed only with the MUST, which demonstrated a 2.34‐fold‐increased risk of mortality . Researchers have suggested that the MUST has performed better than NRS 2002 in trials because NRS 2002 relies on subjective evaluation of disease severity and may add a degree of bias, especially for conditions not specifically listed under the list of clinical states .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying Critically Ill Veterans Who Require Nutrition Intervention: A Quality Improvement Study Comparing Nutrition Risk Tools

Hiller

Metzger

2019

Nut in Clin Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Identification of intensive care unit (ICU) patients who require nutrition intervention is crucial to initiating nutrition therapy. This prospective quality improvement study evaluated the Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS) 2002, Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), and Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill (NUTRIC) score in comparison with the Veterans Administration Nutrition Status Classification (VANSC) tool to determine which best identified the need for nutrition intervention. Methods: A convenience sample of 150 ICU patients was evaluated using the VANSC, NRS 2002, MUST, and the NUTRIC score. The resultant score, need for nutrition intervention, and presence of malnutrition were recorded for patients. Interventions were defined as need for enteral or parenteral nutrition, nutritional supplements, or diet change. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC), F1 score, and accuracy to predict need for nutrition intervention were calculated for each screening tool. Results: Of the 150 patients, 49 (33%) required 1 or more nutrition interventions. The NRS 2002 (0.878) and VANSC (0.816) had the highest sensitivity. The NUTRIC (0.921) and VANSC (0.911) had the highest specificity. The VANSC (0.816) and MUST (0.687) had the highest PPV. The VANSC (0.911) and NRS 2002 (0.872) had the highest NPV. The VANSC (0.727) and MUST (0.528) had the highest MCC. The VANSC (0.816) and MUST (0.680) had the highest F1 score. Conclusions: Trialing several tools to identify their efficacy and reliability individual setting may help determine the most appropriate tool to utilize for your patient population and specific goals. (Nutr Clin Pract. 2019;34:414-420)

show abstract

“…A lack of knowledge about nutrition and the nurses' high workload can lead to underdiagnosed and undertreated malnutrition [21][22][23]. The systematic use of assessment instruments, such as Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS 2002) [24]; the Short Nutritional Assessment Questionnaire (SNAQ) [25]; the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) [26]; or the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) [27], can help to identify malnutrition in patients [28]. However, what if the situation is not recognized or is misinterpreted?…”

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

The associations of palliative care experts regarding food refusal: A cross-sectional study with an open question evaluated by triangulation analysis

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Health professionals in oncologic and palliative care settings are often faced with the problem that patients stop eating and drinking. While the causes of food refusal are very different, the result is often malnutrition, which is linked to health comorbidities and a high mortality rate. However, the professionals lack the time and knowledge to clarify the cause for each patient. What associations do health professionals have when faced with food refusal? Objective To investigate the associations that health professionals in oncological and palliative settings have about denied eating behavior Methods A cross-sectional study, starting with an open question focusing professionals' associations regarding food refusal. The results were inductively analyzed, whereby generic categories were developed. Subsequently, the categories were transformed into quantitative data to calculate the relationships between the categories. Results A total of 350 out of 2000 participants completed the survey, resulting in a response rate of 17.5%. Food refusal is primarily associated with physical and ethical aspects and with endof-life. Half of the participants frequently find that patients refuse to eat. The attitudes show that the autonomy of the patient is the highest good and is to be respected. Even in the case of patients with limited decision-making capacity, the refusal to eat is acceptable.

show abstract

Nutritional Risk Screening 2002, Short Nutritional Assessment Questionnaire, Malnutrition Screening Tool, and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool Are Good Predictors of Nutrition Risk in an Emergency Service

Cited by 74 publications

References 30 publications

Comparação dos critérios da nrs-2002 com o risco nutricional em pacientes hospitalizados

Comparação dos critérios da nrs-2002 com o risco nutricional em pacientes hospitalizados

Identifying Critically Ill Veterans Who Require Nutrition Intervention: A Quality Improvement Study Comparing Nutrition Risk Tools

The associations of palliative care experts regarding food refusal: A cross-sectional study with an open question evaluated by triangulation analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About