Baseline Nutritional Status and Rehabilitation Progress in Individuals Requiring Inpatient Rehabilitation: A Retrospective Cohort Study

To evaluate the relationships between baseline nutritional status, medical events (MEs), and rehabilitation outcomes in individuals undergoing inpatient rehabilitation (IR). A retrospective single center cohort study. An IR ward. This study included 409 patients (mean age, 80 years; men, 170 [42%])...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation 2024-09, Vol.6 (3), p.100362, Article 100362
Hauptverfasser: Arai, Hideki, Okada, Syuya, Fukuoka, Tatsuyuki, Nozoe, Masafumi, Kamiya, Kuniyasu, Matsumoto, Satoru
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To evaluate the relationships between baseline nutritional status, medical events (MEs), and rehabilitation outcomes in individuals undergoing inpatient rehabilitation (IR). A retrospective single center cohort study. An IR ward. This study included 409 patients (mean age, 80 years; men, 170 [42%]) undergoing IR for hospital-associated deconditioning, neurologic disorders, or musculoskeletal diseases. Participants were grouped according to the Controlling Nutritional Status score at admission: normal nutrition (NN): 0 to 1, mild malnutrition (MM): 2 to 4, and moderate/severe malnutrition (M/SM): 5 to 12. None. The primary outcomes included MEs leading to death or acute illness requiring transfer to other hospitals for specialized treatments. The secondary outcomes were the rehabilitation efficiency scores (changes in Functional Independence Measure [FIM] score divided by length of stay) for motor function (FIM-M) and cognitive function (FIM-C). Among the 409 participants, 300 (73%) were malnourished at admission. The adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) for MEs in the MM and M/SM groups relative to the NN group were 1.48 (0.67-3.27) and 0.98 (0.34-2.81), respectively. No significant differences were observed among the 3 groups in FIM-M efficiency scores (mean ± SD, NN: 0.49±0.51 vs MM: 0.41±0.57 vs M/SM: 0.44±1.06, P=.7) or FIM-C efficiency scores (0.04±0.06 vs 0.04±0.06 vs 0.08±0.4, P=0.1). Analysis of covariance showed no significant association between MM or M/SM group and FIM-M efficiency score (beta coefficient = -0.038, P=.6; beta coefficient = 0.15, P=.1, respectively) or FIM-C efficiency score (beta coefficient = 0.004, P=.8; beta coefficient = 0.047, P=.08, respectively). No significant associations were observed between the baseline nutritional status and MEs, FIM-M efficiency score, or FIM-C efficiency score in individuals undergoing IR.
ISSN:2590-1095
2590-1095
DOI:10.1016/j.arrct.2024.100362