We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Prognostic differences of the Mini Nutritional Assessment short form and long form in relation to 1-year functional decline and mortality in community-dwelling older adults receiving home care.
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2014 March
OBJECTIVES: To compare the prognostic value of the revised Mini Nutritional Assessment short form (MNA-SF) classification with that of the long form (MNA-LF) in relation to mortality and functional change in community-dwelling older adults receiving home care in Germany.
DESIGN: Multicenter, 1-year prospective observational study.
SETTING: Community.
PARTICIPANTS: Older adults (≥ 65) receiving home care (n = 309).
MEASUREMENTS: Nutritional status (well nourished, at risk of malnutrition, malnourished) was classified using the MNA-SF and MNA-LF at baseline. Functional status was determined according to the Barthel Index of activities of daily living (ADLs) at baseline and after 1 year. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of mortality were calculated for MNA-SF and MNA-LF categories using stepwise Cox regression analyses. Repeated-measurements analysis of covariance was used to examine changes in ADL scores over time for MNA-SF and MNA-LF categories.
RESULTS: MNA-SF classified 15% of the sample as malnourished and 41% as being at risk of malnutrition, whereas the MNA-LF classified 14% and 58%, respectively. During the follow-up year, 15% of participants died. The estimated hazard ratios (HR) for 1-year mortality were lower for MNA-SF than for MNA-LF categories (at risk of malnutrition: HR = 2.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.02-4.75 vs HR = 5.05, 95% CI = 1.53-16.58; malnourished: HR = 3.27, 95% CI = 1.34-8.02 vs HR = 8.75, 95% CI = 2.45-31.18). For MNA-SF categories, no differences in functional change were found. According to the MNA-LF, ADL decline tended to be greater in those at risk of malnutrition (7.1 ± 10.1 points) than in those who were well nourished (3.7 ± 10.1 points) and malnourished (4.9 ± 10.1 points).
CONCLUSION: In this sample of older adults receiving home care, the MNA-LF was superior to the MNA-SF in predicting mortality and differentiating functional decline during 1 year of follow-up.
DESIGN: Multicenter, 1-year prospective observational study.
SETTING: Community.
PARTICIPANTS: Older adults (≥ 65) receiving home care (n = 309).
MEASUREMENTS: Nutritional status (well nourished, at risk of malnutrition, malnourished) was classified using the MNA-SF and MNA-LF at baseline. Functional status was determined according to the Barthel Index of activities of daily living (ADLs) at baseline and after 1 year. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of mortality were calculated for MNA-SF and MNA-LF categories using stepwise Cox regression analyses. Repeated-measurements analysis of covariance was used to examine changes in ADL scores over time for MNA-SF and MNA-LF categories.
RESULTS: MNA-SF classified 15% of the sample as malnourished and 41% as being at risk of malnutrition, whereas the MNA-LF classified 14% and 58%, respectively. During the follow-up year, 15% of participants died. The estimated hazard ratios (HR) for 1-year mortality were lower for MNA-SF than for MNA-LF categories (at risk of malnutrition: HR = 2.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.02-4.75 vs HR = 5.05, 95% CI = 1.53-16.58; malnourished: HR = 3.27, 95% CI = 1.34-8.02 vs HR = 8.75, 95% CI = 2.45-31.18). For MNA-SF categories, no differences in functional change were found. According to the MNA-LF, ADL decline tended to be greater in those at risk of malnutrition (7.1 ± 10.1 points) than in those who were well nourished (3.7 ± 10.1 points) and malnourished (4.9 ± 10.1 points).
CONCLUSION: In this sample of older adults receiving home care, the MNA-LF was superior to the MNA-SF in predicting mortality and differentiating functional decline during 1 year of follow-up.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app