2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.clnesp.2022.04.023
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Recommendations for nutritional assessment across clinical practice guidelines: A scoping review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Handgrip strength has previously been linked to longer hospitalization but MUAC has never been studied from this perspective since it is commonly more used in the pediatric population [35,36]. Our findings may help in adding simple anthropometric measurements not requiring expensive tools such as MUAC in assessing muscle mass as part of GLIM criteria when body impedance analysis (BIA) or dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry DEXA are not available [37].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Handgrip strength has previously been linked to longer hospitalization but MUAC has never been studied from this perspective since it is commonly more used in the pediatric population [35,36]. Our findings may help in adding simple anthropometric measurements not requiring expensive tools such as MUAC in assessing muscle mass as part of GLIM criteria when body impedance analysis (BIA) or dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry DEXA are not available [37].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…The main objective of the present study was to investigate whether the nutritional status of palliative cancer patients receiving home parenteral nutrition can be used as a prognostic factor for survival. According to a recent scoping review [15], clinical practice guidelines for nutritional assessment are not uniform with regard to the choice of specific tools and criteria. In this study, both the most commonly used tools, i.e., the body mass index and the Subjective Global Assessment, and those less commonly used in clinical practice, such as the GLIM criteria, the Nutritional Risk Index, the Geriatric Nutritional For NRI, the cut-off point was 72.67: p = 0.001 (AUC = 0.626; 95%CI 0.549-0.704).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The association that we have demonstrated between social determinants and food security should alarm healthcare professionals to broaden their perspective when identifying malnutrition in hospitalized patients. When conducting nutritional assessments, including the GLIM criteria or any validated tool, it is advisable to incorporate a social dimension and identify any factors that increase the risk of malnutrition, such as food insecurity, low income, or low literacy levels ( 29 , 40 ). When developing a management plan for malnutrition in hospitalized patients, it is crucial to address social determinants and food security as essential components.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%