We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Comparing the adequacy of the MNA-SF, NRS-2002 and MUST nutritional tools in assessing malnutrition in hip fracture operated elderly patients.
Clinical Nutrition 2016 October
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Malnutrition is common in hip fracture elderly patients. There is no gold standard for screening nutritional risk. We compared the adequacy of 3 screening tools, their association to nutritional measurements and their ability to predict outcome.
METHODS: The Mini Nutrition Assessment Short Form (MNA-SF), the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) and the Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002) were prospectively determined. Length of stay (LOS), complications, 6 months readmission and up-to 36 months mortality were recorded.
RESULTS: 215 operated patients were included: 154 (71.6%) were women; mean age was 83.5 ± 6.09 years (66-104). According to the MNA-SF, 95 patients were well-nourished, 95 were at risk of malnutrition and 25 were malnourished. Based on the MUST, 171 patients were at a low risk of malnutrition, 31 at a medium risk, 13 at a high risk. According to the NRS-2002, 134 patients were at a low risk of malnutrition, 70 at a medium risk, 11 at a high risk. A significant relationship between the nutritional groups of the 3 scores (p < 0.001) was found. In all screening tools, body mass index, weight loss and food intake prior to admission were found to be related to the patients' nutritional status (p < 0.001). No differences in LOS and complications were found between the patients' nutritional status of each screening tool; only the MNA-SF predicted that well-nourished patients would have less readmissions during a 6 month follow-up (p = 0.024). During a 36 month follow-up, 79 patients died. According to the MNA-SF, mortality was lower in the well-nourished patients vs. the malnourished (p = 0.001) and at risk of malnutrition patients (p = 0.01). A less significant association was found between the NRS-2002 patients' nutritional status and mortality (p = 0.048). The MUST did not reveal this relationship.
CONCLUSIONS: All screening tools were adequate in assessing malnutrition parameters in hip fracture operated elderly patients, however, only the MNA-SF could also predict readmissions and mortality.
METHODS: The Mini Nutrition Assessment Short Form (MNA-SF), the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) and the Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002) were prospectively determined. Length of stay (LOS), complications, 6 months readmission and up-to 36 months mortality were recorded.
RESULTS: 215 operated patients were included: 154 (71.6%) were women; mean age was 83.5 ± 6.09 years (66-104). According to the MNA-SF, 95 patients were well-nourished, 95 were at risk of malnutrition and 25 were malnourished. Based on the MUST, 171 patients were at a low risk of malnutrition, 31 at a medium risk, 13 at a high risk. According to the NRS-2002, 134 patients were at a low risk of malnutrition, 70 at a medium risk, 11 at a high risk. A significant relationship between the nutritional groups of the 3 scores (p < 0.001) was found. In all screening tools, body mass index, weight loss and food intake prior to admission were found to be related to the patients' nutritional status (p < 0.001). No differences in LOS and complications were found between the patients' nutritional status of each screening tool; only the MNA-SF predicted that well-nourished patients would have less readmissions during a 6 month follow-up (p = 0.024). During a 36 month follow-up, 79 patients died. According to the MNA-SF, mortality was lower in the well-nourished patients vs. the malnourished (p = 0.001) and at risk of malnutrition patients (p = 0.01). A less significant association was found between the NRS-2002 patients' nutritional status and mortality (p = 0.048). The MUST did not reveal this relationship.
CONCLUSIONS: All screening tools were adequate in assessing malnutrition parameters in hip fracture operated elderly patients, however, only the MNA-SF could also predict readmissions and mortality.
Full text links
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