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] A COMPARISON OF THE NUTRITION SCREENING TOOL AND MALNUTRITION UNIVERSAL SCREENING TOOL ON REFERRAL RATES FOR DIETETIC ASSESSMENTS
    Gopalakrishnan, K.
    Smith, H.
    Hewett, R.
    Poullis, A.
    GUT, 2014, 63 : S268 - A269
  • [3] Screening for malnutrition: Impact of the malnutrition universal screening tool (MUST)
    Jaafar, A
    Hawkyard, C
    Lapworth, K
    Davidson, B
    Ledger, J
    Wilkins, J
    Mansfield, J
    Thompson, NP
    GUT, 2003, 52 : A11 - A11
  • [4] 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
  • [5] Nutrition screening in public hospital emergency rooms: Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool and Nutritional Risk Screening-2002 can be applied
    Raupp, D.
    Silva, F. M.
    Marcadenti, A.
    Rabito, E., I
    Fink, J. da Silva
    Becher, P.
    Gottschall, C.
    PUBLIC HEALTH, 2018, 165 : 6 - 8
  • [6] A local nutritional screening tool compared to malnutrition universal screening tool
    Gerasimidis, K.
    Drongitis, P.
    Murray, L.
    Young, D.
    McKee, R. F.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION, 2007, 61 (07) : 916 - 921
  • [7] A local nutritional screening tool compared to malnutrition universal screening tool
    K Gerasimidis
    P Drongitis
    L Murray
    D Young
    R F McKee
    European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2007, 61 : 916 - 921
  • [8] 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
  • [9] Neurological patients at risk of malnutrition are not always identified by the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool
    Yates, S.
    Bonney, A. H. M.
    Green, K.
    Harding, E.
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE NUTRITION SOCIETY, 2010, 69 (OCE7) : E575 - E575
  • [10] 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