Application of NRS2002 and PG-SGA in nutritional assessment for perioperative patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: An observational study

被引:0
作者
Tu, Yi [1 ]
Chen, Fengzhou [2 ]
Yu, Qing [1 ]
Song, Linglan [3 ]
Chen, Mengmeng [4 ]
机构
[1] Chinese Acad Sci, Zhejiang Canc Hosp, Inst Basic Med & Canc IBMC, Dept Thyroid Surg, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, Peoples R China
[2] Chinese Acad Sci, Zhejiang Canc Hosp, Inst Basic Med & Canc IBMC, Dept Intens Care Unit, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, Peoples R China
[3] Chinese Acad Sci, Zhejiang Canc Hosp, Inst Basic Med & Canc IBMC, Dept Clin Nutr, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, Peoples R China
[4] Zhejiang Canc Hosp, Dept Nursing, Hangzhou 310022, Zhejiang, Peoples R China
关键词
head and neck squamous cell carcinoma; NRS2002; nutritional assessment; nutritional screening; perioperative period; PG-SGA; SUPPORT; RISK; GUIDELINES; NRS-2002; THERAPY; TOOL;
D O I
10.1097/MD.0000000000040025
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of 2 nutritional assessment tools, the Nutritional Risk Screening Scale 2002 (NRS2002) and the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA), for evaluating the nutritional status of perioperative head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients, to facilitate early nutritional interventions and improve clinical outcomes. An observational, comparative study was conducted at the Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, recruiting patients diagnosed with HNSCC scheduled for surgical treatment. The NRS2002 and PG-SGA were applied to assess patients' nutritional risk at multiple time points: upon admission, the day before surgery, 2 days after surgery, a week after surgery, and at discharge. Statistical analyses were performed using McNemar and Kappa tests to assess differences and consistency between NRS2002 and PG-SGA. A total of 209 patients were included in this study, predominantly male, with an average age of 60 years. Nutritional risk assessments identified an inverted "V" trend in nutritional risk, with the peak occurring 2 days post-surgery. PG-SGA consistently showed a higher screening positivity rate compared to NRS2002. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis highlighted the discriminative power of both tools, with PG-SGA and NRS2002 showing high area under the curve values. Both NRS2002 and PG-SGA are effective for nutritional screening in HNSCC patients, with PG-SGA demonstrating a slightly higher sensitivity before surgery. PG-SGA may be more suitable for preoperative application, whereas NRS2002 is more appropriate for postoperative use.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 32 条
  • [1] Ackerman Denise, 2018, Cancer Treat Res, V174, P187, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-65421-8_11
  • [2] Pattern of nutritional status in node-negative versus node-positive head and neck cancer patients undergoing treatment: a prospective cohort study
    Arora, Anshika
    Saini, Sunil
    Gupta, Meenu
    [J]. SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2022, 30 (10) : 8029 - 8039
  • [3] Use of the scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) as a nutrition assessment tool in patients with cancer
    Bauer, J
    Capra, S
    Ferguson, M
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION, 2002, 56 (08) : 779 - 785
  • [4] Head and Neck Cancers, Version 1.2022 Featured Updates to the NCCN Guidelines
    Caudell, Jimmy J.
    Gillison, Maura L.
    Maghami, Ellie
    Spencer, Sharon
    Pfister, David G.
    Adkins, Douglas
    Birkeland, Andrew C.
    Brizel, David M.
    Busse, Paul M.
    Cmelak, Anthony J.
    Colevas, A. Dimitrios
    Eisele, David W.
    Galloway, Thomas
    Geiger, Jessica L.
    Haddad, Robert, I
    Hicks, Wesley L.
    Hitchcock, Ying J.
    Jimeno, Antonio
    Leizman, Debra
    Mell, Loren K.
    Mittal, Bharat B.
    Pinto, Harlan A.
    Rocco, James W.
    Rodriguez, Cristina P.
    Savvides, Panayiotis S.
    Schwartz, David
    Shah, Jatin P.
    Sher, David
    St John, Maie
    Weber, Randal S.
    Weinstein, Gregory
    Worden, Frank
    Bruce, Justine Yang
    Yom, Sue S.
    Zhen, Weining
    Burns, Jennifer L.
    Darlow, Susan D.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE CANCER NETWORK, 2022, 20 (03): : 224 - 234
  • [5] Chen CM Joint Joint Data Collection and Analysis Cooperation Group of China Obesity Working Group of China Office of the International Society of Life Science, 2001, CHIN J PREV MED, V35, P349, DOI [10.3760/j:issn:0253-9624.2001.05.019, DOI 10.3760/J:ISSN:0253-9624.2001.05.019]
  • [6] Diagnostic test accuracy of preoperative nutritional screening tools in adults for malnutrition: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
    Cheung, Helen Hoi Ting
    Joynt, Gavin Matthew
    Lee, Anna
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2024, 110 (02) : 1090 - 1098
  • [7] Head and Neck Cancer
    Chow, Laura Q. M.
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2020, 382 (01) : 60 - 72
  • [8] Development of a nutritional risk screening tool for cancer patients undergoing outpatient treatment
    Guirao, Thauany Nantes
    Prates de Oliveira, Sofia Teixeira
    Bezerra, Amanda Escobar
    Francoso, Bruna Silvestre
    dos Santos, Arbara David
    Faccioli Sicchieri, Juliana Maria
    Chiarello, Paula Garcia
    [J]. CLINICAL NUTRITION ESPEN, 2022, 52 : 240 - 244
  • [9] A comparison of the MNA-SF, MUST, and NRS-2002 nutritional tools in predicting treatment incompletion of concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with head and neck cancer
    Hsueh, Shun-Wen
    Lai, Cheng-Chou
    Hung, Chia-Yen
    Lin, Yu-Ching
    Lu, Chang-Hsien
    Yeh, Kun-Yun
    Tsang, Ngan-Ming
    Hung, Yu-Shin
    Chang, Pei-Hung
    Chou, Wen-Chi
    [J]. SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2021, 29 (09) : 5455 - 5462
  • [10] Self-Completion of the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment Short Form Is Feasible and Is Associated With Increased Awareness on Malnutrition Risk in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer
    Jager-Wittenaar, Harriet
    de Bats, Hester F.
    Welink-Lamberts, Bertine J.
    Gort-van Dijk, Dorienke
    van der Laan, Bernard F. A. M.
    Ottery, Faith D.
    Roodenburg, Jan L. N.
    [J]. NUTRITION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2020, 35 (02) : 353 - 362