Incorporating the Malnutrition Screening Tool and the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool in Rehabilitation Practice: Comparison With the Nutrition Risk Screening 2002

被引:0
|
作者
Adiguzel, Kuebra Tel [1 ]
Caliskan, Hatice Aybuke [1 ]
Isik, Fatma Berna [1 ]
Erdogan, Hilal Caybasi [1 ]
Aksit, Sena [1 ]
Mansiz, Suna [1 ]
Adiguzel, Emre [2 ]
Yasar, Evren [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hlth Sci Turkey, Gulhane Hlth Sci Fac, Dept Nutr & Dietet, Ankara, Turkiye
[2] Univ Hlth Sci Turkey, Phys Med & Rehabil Hosp, Ankara Bilkent City Hosp, Ankara, Turkiye
[3] Univ Hlth Sci Turkey, Gulhane Sch Med, Dept Phys Med & Rehabil, Ankara, Turkiye
[4] Yozgat Bozok Univ, Yozgat, Turkiye
来源
FOOD SCIENCE & NUTRITION | 2025年 / 13卷 / 01期
关键词
malnutrition; malnutrition risk; rehabilitation; STROKE; MORTALITY; COSTS;
D O I
10.1002/fsn3.4676
中图分类号
TS2 [食品工业];
学科分类号
0832 ;
摘要
To demonstrate the prevalence of malnutrition risk in a specific rehabilitation setting. The secondary aim of the study was to compare Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST) and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) with Nutritional Risk Screening-2002 (NRS-2002). Patients diagnosed with stroke, anoxic brain injury, spinal cord injury, multiple sclerosis, arthritis, neuromuscular diseases, Parkinson's disease, and lymphedema who were admitted to a rehabilitation hospital were included. NRS-2002, MST, and MUST were used to assess malnutrition risk. Body weight (kg), height (cm), and mid upper arm circumference (cm) were measured. Twenty-four hours dietary records were obtained. Routine blood test results were recorded from patient files. Five hundred sixteen patients with a mean age of 54.3 +/- 18.0 years were included. The most prominent diagnoses were stroke and spinal cord injury. According to NRS-2002, 71.7% (n = 370) of the patients were at low risk, but 28.3% (n = 146) of the patients were at high risk. Comparisons between NRS-2002 and MST showed that these two scales have similar results at classifying patients for malnutrition risk (p = 0.154). Comparison between NRS-2002 and MUST showed significant differences (p < 0.001). Both sensitivity and specificity of MST were above 80.0%. Sensitivity of MUST was 78.1% and specificity was 88.1%. Approximately one-third of the patients were at risk of malnutrition. Specificity and sensitivity of MST and MUST were as high as routinely used scale NRS-2002, and therefore it can be supposed that, considering the diagnostic groups of the patients, MST and MUST are useful in rehabilitation practice.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] 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, Flavia Moraes
    NUTRITION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2017, 32 (04) : 526 - 532
  • [2] Identifying malnutrition risk in acute medical patients: Validity and utility of Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool and Modified Malnutrition Screening Tool
    Gibson, Simone
    Sequeira, Jennifer
    Cant, Robyn
    Ku, Christopher
    NUTRITION & DIETETICS, 2012, 69 (04) : 309 - 314
  • [3] Association of nutrition risk screening 2002 and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool with COVID-19 severity in hospitalized patients in Iran
    Eslamian, Ghazaleh
    Sali, Sohrab
    Babaei, Mansour
    Parastouei, Karim
    Moghadam, Dorsa Arman
    ACUTE AND CRITICAL CARE, 2022, 37 (03) : 332 - 338
  • [4] Malnutrition screening tool and malnutrition universal screening tool as a predictors of prolonged hospital stay and hospital mortality: A cohort study
    dos Santos, Tainara Aloy
    Luft, Vivian Cristine
    Souza, Gabriela Correa
    Santos, Zilda de Albuquerque
    Jochims, Ana Maria Keller
    de Almeida, Jussara Carnevale
    CLINICAL NUTRITION ESPEN, 2023, 54 : 430 - 435
  • [5] An Observational Cohort Study Investigating Risk of Malnutrition Using the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool in Patients with Stroke
    Sremanakova, Jana
    Burden, Sorrel
    Kama, Yassin
    Gittins, Mathew
    Lal, Simon
    Smith, Craig J.
    Hamdy, Shaheen
    JOURNAL OF STROKE & CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASES, 2019, 28 (12)
  • [6] The Graz Malnutrition Screening (GMS): a new hospital screening tool for malnutrition
    Roller, Regina E.
    Eglseer, Doris
    Eisenberger, Anna
    Wirnsberger, Gerhard H.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF NUTRITION, 2016, 115 (04) : 650 - 657
  • [7] Screening for malnutrition among nursing home residents - a comparative analysis of the Mini Nutritional Assessment, the Nutritional Risk Screening, and the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool
    Diekmann, R.
    Winning, K.
    Uter, W.
    Kaiser, M. J.
    Sieber, C. C.
    Volkert, D.
    Bauer, J. M.
    JOURNAL OF NUTRITION HEALTH & AGING, 2013, 17 (04) : 326 - 331
  • [8] The Validity of Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) for Nutritional Screening in Hemodialysis Patients
    Uyar, Seyit
    Kok, Mehmet
    Unal, Aysun
    Koker, Gokhan
    Dolu, Suleyman
    Inci, Ayca
    Cekin, Ayhan Hilmi
    TURKISH JOURNAL OF NEPHROLOGY, 2019, 28 (02): : 109 - 113
  • [9] Implementation of nutrition risk screening using the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool across a large metropolitan health service
    Cooper, P. L.
    Raja, R.
    Golder, J.
    Stewart, A. J.
    Shaikh, R. F.
    Apostolides, M.
    Savva, J.
    Sequeira, J. L.
    Silvers, M. A.
    JOURNAL OF HUMAN NUTRITION AND DIETETICS, 2016, 29 (06) : 697 - 703
  • [10] Malnutrition risk in hospitalized patients measured with Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 tool and its association with in-hospital mortality
    Bakkaloglu, O. K.
    Bektas, M.
    Ince, B.
    Amikishiyev, S.
    Tor, Y. B.
    Altinkaynak, M.
    Goksoy, Y.
    Ozmen, B.
    Buyukdemir, S.
    Erten, S. N.
    Akpinar, T. S.
    Saka, B.
    EUROPEAN REVIEW FOR MEDICAL AND PHARMACOLOGICAL SCIENCES, 2023, 27 (12) : 5812 - 5821