Evaluation of the nutritional status of older hospitalised geriatric patients: a comparative analysis of a Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) version and the Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS 2002)
Background The present study aimed to evaluate a short‐form (MNA‐SF) version of the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), in which some of the items were operationalised, based on scores from tools used for a comprehensive geriatric assessment, as a method for analysing the nutritional status of hospit...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of human nutrition and dietetics 2016-12, Vol.29 (6), p.704-713 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 713 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 6 |
| container_start_page | 704 |
| container_title | Journal of human nutrition and dietetics |
| container_volume | 29 |
| creator | Christner, S. Ritt, M. Volkert, D. Wirth, R. Sieber, C. C. Gaßmann, K.-G. |
| description | Background
The present study aimed to evaluate a short‐form (MNA‐SF) version of the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), in which some of the items were operationalised, based on scores from tools used for a comprehensive geriatric assessment, as a method for analysing the nutritional status of hospitalised geriatric patients. We compared this MNA‐SF version with the corresponding MNA long‐form (MNA‐LF) and Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002) in terms of completion rate, prevalence and agreement regarding malnutrition and/or the risk of this.
Methods
In total, 201 patients aged ≥65 years who were hospitalised in geriatric wards were included in this analysis.
Results
The MNA‐SF, MNA‐LF and NRS 2002 were completed in 98.0%, 95.5% and 99.5% of patients (P = 0.06), respectively. The MNA‐SF, MNA‐LF and NRS 2002 categorised 93.4%, 91.1% and 66.0% of patients as being malnourished or at risk of being malnourished (P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/jhn.12376 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1850780764</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1826697194</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4246-930fed01b40772176257fc259bb36f54e172c21fd1379bb3d93ca206087d64c53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkt9u0zAUhy0EYmVwwQsgS9y0F9n8J7ET7qppbExrkFoQiBvLdZzVXZpkPkmhr8eT4bTbNCEh4RtLx9_5dI78Q-gtJSc0nNP1qj6hjEvxDI0oF0nEpPz-HI1IlrCIp5IeoVcAa0KIoIS8REdMsiyllI_Q7_OtrnrduabGTYm7lcV133k3FHSFodNdD8NLUxXW41UDret05cAW-MZ6pwNrcBsEtu7gA9bYNJtW-1DYWqyDYwduL9B45mqH8yf2KYAF2IROPJ7l0wneWg_DJLou9qM8hecObvHCeGtrV9_gcT5fYEYIm7xGL0pdgX1zfx-jrx_Pv5xdRtefLz6dTa8jE7NYRBknpS0IXcZESkalYIksDUuy5ZKLMoktlcwwWhaUy6FWZNxoRgRJZSFik_BjND54W9_c9RY6tXFgbFXp2jY9KJomRKZEivg_UCZEJmk2oO__QtdN78PCAxUnhPE0HqjJgTK-AfC2VK13G-13ihI1ZECFDKh9BgL77t7YLze2eCQfPj0Apwfgp6vs7t8mdXWZPyijQ4eDzv567ND-VgnJZaK-5Rcqn8mr-Y9Frgj_A2k_yuE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1845023844</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of the nutritional status of older hospitalised geriatric patients: a comparative analysis of a Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) version and the Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS 2002)</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Christner, S. ; Ritt, M. ; Volkert, D. ; Wirth, R. ; Sieber, C. C. ; Gaßmann, K.-G.</creator><creatorcontrib>Christner, S. ; Ritt, M. ; Volkert, D. ; Wirth, R. ; Sieber, C. C. ; Gaßmann, K.-G.</creatorcontrib><description>Background
The present study aimed to evaluate a short‐form (MNA‐SF) version of the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), in which some of the items were operationalised, based on scores from tools used for a comprehensive geriatric assessment, as a method for analysing the nutritional status of hospitalised geriatric patients. We compared this MNA‐SF version with the corresponding MNA long‐form (MNA‐LF) and Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002) in terms of completion rate, prevalence and agreement regarding malnutrition and/or the risk of this.
Methods
In total, 201 patients aged ≥65 years who were hospitalised in geriatric wards were included in this analysis.
Results
The MNA‐SF, MNA‐LF and NRS 2002 were completed in 98.0%, 95.5% and 99.5% of patients (P = 0.06), respectively. The MNA‐SF, MNA‐LF and NRS 2002 categorised 93.4%, 91.1% and 66.0% of patients as being malnourished or at risk of being malnourished (P < 0.001). Agreement between the MNA‐SF and MNA‐LF was substantial (κ = 0.70, P < 0.001). No agreement between the MNA‐SF and NRS 2002 was found (κ = −0.12, P < 0.001). Interestingly, NRS 2002 part 1 (prescreening) revealed a false negative rate of 21.0% (only in patients aged ≥70 years who showed moderate disease severity) in relation to the NRS 2002 part 2.
Conclusions
The MNA‐SF version emerged as a useful tool for evaluating the nutritional status of hospitalised geriatric patients. The NRS 2002 part 1 showed limited value as a prescreening aid in relation to the NRS 2002 part 2 in the same group of patients.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0952-3871</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-277X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/jhn.12376</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27298113</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Agreements ; clinical nutrition ; Female ; Geriatric Assessment - methods ; Geriatrics ; Humans ; Inpatients ; Male ; Malnutrition ; Malnutrition - diagnosis ; Mass Screening - methods ; Nutrition Assessment ; nutrition screening ; nutritional assessment ; Risk Assessment - methods</subject><ispartof>Journal of human nutrition and dietetics, 2016-12, Vol.29 (6), p.704-713</ispartof><rights>2016 The British Dietetic Association Ltd.</rights><rights>2016 The British Dietetic Association Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4246-930fed01b40772176257fc259bb36f54e172c21fd1379bb3d93ca206087d64c53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4246-930fed01b40772176257fc259bb36f54e172c21fd1379bb3d93ca206087d64c53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fjhn.12376$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fjhn.12376$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27923,27924,45573,45574</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27298113$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Christner, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ritt, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Volkert, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wirth, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sieber, C. C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaßmann, K.-G.</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of the nutritional status of older hospitalised geriatric patients: a comparative analysis of a Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) version and the Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS 2002)</title><title>Journal of human nutrition and dietetics</title><addtitle>J Hum Nutr Diet</addtitle><description>Background
The present study aimed to evaluate a short‐form (MNA‐SF) version of the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), in which some of the items were operationalised, based on scores from tools used for a comprehensive geriatric assessment, as a method for analysing the nutritional status of hospitalised geriatric patients. We compared this MNA‐SF version with the corresponding MNA long‐form (MNA‐LF) and Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002) in terms of completion rate, prevalence and agreement regarding malnutrition and/or the risk of this.
Methods
In total, 201 patients aged ≥65 years who were hospitalised in geriatric wards were included in this analysis.
Results
The MNA‐SF, MNA‐LF and NRS 2002 were completed in 98.0%, 95.5% and 99.5% of patients (P = 0.06), respectively. The MNA‐SF, MNA‐LF and NRS 2002 categorised 93.4%, 91.1% and 66.0% of patients as being malnourished or at risk of being malnourished (P < 0.001). Agreement between the MNA‐SF and MNA‐LF was substantial (κ = 0.70, P < 0.001). No agreement between the MNA‐SF and NRS 2002 was found (κ = −0.12, P < 0.001). Interestingly, NRS 2002 part 1 (prescreening) revealed a false negative rate of 21.0% (only in patients aged ≥70 years who showed moderate disease severity) in relation to the NRS 2002 part 2.
Conclusions
The MNA‐SF version emerged as a useful tool for evaluating the nutritional status of hospitalised geriatric patients. The NRS 2002 part 1 showed limited value as a prescreening aid in relation to the NRS 2002 part 2 in the same group of patients.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Agreements</subject><subject>clinical nutrition</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Geriatric Assessment - methods</subject><subject>Geriatrics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Inpatients</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Malnutrition</subject><subject>Malnutrition - diagnosis</subject><subject>Mass Screening - methods</subject><subject>Nutrition Assessment</subject><subject>nutrition screening</subject><subject>nutritional assessment</subject><subject>Risk Assessment - methods</subject><issn>0952-3871</issn><issn>1365-277X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkt9u0zAUhy0EYmVwwQsgS9y0F9n8J7ET7qppbExrkFoQiBvLdZzVXZpkPkmhr8eT4bTbNCEh4RtLx9_5dI78Q-gtJSc0nNP1qj6hjEvxDI0oF0nEpPz-HI1IlrCIp5IeoVcAa0KIoIS8REdMsiyllI_Q7_OtrnrduabGTYm7lcV133k3FHSFodNdD8NLUxXW41UDret05cAW-MZ6pwNrcBsEtu7gA9bYNJtW-1DYWqyDYwduL9B45mqH8yf2KYAF2IROPJ7l0wneWg_DJLou9qM8hecObvHCeGtrV9_gcT5fYEYIm7xGL0pdgX1zfx-jrx_Pv5xdRtefLz6dTa8jE7NYRBknpS0IXcZESkalYIksDUuy5ZKLMoktlcwwWhaUy6FWZNxoRgRJZSFik_BjND54W9_c9RY6tXFgbFXp2jY9KJomRKZEivg_UCZEJmk2oO__QtdN78PCAxUnhPE0HqjJgTK-AfC2VK13G-13ihI1ZECFDKh9BgL77t7YLze2eCQfPj0Apwfgp6vs7t8mdXWZPyijQ4eDzv567ND-VgnJZaK-5Rcqn8mr-Y9Frgj_A2k_yuE</recordid><startdate>201612</startdate><enddate>201612</enddate><creator>Christner, S.</creator><creator>Ritt, M.</creator><creator>Volkert, D.</creator><creator>Wirth, R.</creator><creator>Sieber, C. C.</creator><creator>Gaßmann, K.-G.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201612</creationdate><title>Evaluation of the nutritional status of older hospitalised geriatric patients: a comparative analysis of a Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) version and the Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS 2002)</title><author>Christner, S. ; Ritt, M. ; Volkert, D. ; Wirth, R. ; Sieber, C. C. ; Gaßmann, K.-G.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4246-930fed01b40772176257fc259bb36f54e172c21fd1379bb3d93ca206087d64c53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Agreements</topic><topic>clinical nutrition</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Geriatric Assessment - methods</topic><topic>Geriatrics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Inpatients</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Malnutrition</topic><topic>Malnutrition - diagnosis</topic><topic>Mass Screening - methods</topic><topic>Nutrition Assessment</topic><topic>nutrition screening</topic><topic>nutritional assessment</topic><topic>Risk Assessment - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Christner, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ritt, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Volkert, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wirth, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sieber, C. C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaßmann, K.-G.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of human nutrition and dietetics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Christner, S.</au><au>Ritt, M.</au><au>Volkert, D.</au><au>Wirth, R.</au><au>Sieber, C. C.</au><au>Gaßmann, K.-G.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of the nutritional status of older hospitalised geriatric patients: a comparative analysis of a Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) version and the Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS 2002)</atitle><jtitle>Journal of human nutrition and dietetics</jtitle><addtitle>J Hum Nutr Diet</addtitle><date>2016-12</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>704</spage><epage>713</epage><pages>704-713</pages><issn>0952-3871</issn><eissn>1365-277X</eissn><abstract>Background
The present study aimed to evaluate a short‐form (MNA‐SF) version of the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), in which some of the items were operationalised, based on scores from tools used for a comprehensive geriatric assessment, as a method for analysing the nutritional status of hospitalised geriatric patients. We compared this MNA‐SF version with the corresponding MNA long‐form (MNA‐LF) and Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002) in terms of completion rate, prevalence and agreement regarding malnutrition and/or the risk of this.
Methods
In total, 201 patients aged ≥65 years who were hospitalised in geriatric wards were included in this analysis.
Results
The MNA‐SF, MNA‐LF and NRS 2002 were completed in 98.0%, 95.5% and 99.5% of patients (P = 0.06), respectively. The MNA‐SF, MNA‐LF and NRS 2002 categorised 93.4%, 91.1% and 66.0% of patients as being malnourished or at risk of being malnourished (P < 0.001). Agreement between the MNA‐SF and MNA‐LF was substantial (κ = 0.70, P < 0.001). No agreement between the MNA‐SF and NRS 2002 was found (κ = −0.12, P < 0.001). Interestingly, NRS 2002 part 1 (prescreening) revealed a false negative rate of 21.0% (only in patients aged ≥70 years who showed moderate disease severity) in relation to the NRS 2002 part 2.
Conclusions
The MNA‐SF version emerged as a useful tool for evaluating the nutritional status of hospitalised geriatric patients. The NRS 2002 part 1 showed limited value as a prescreening aid in relation to the NRS 2002 part 2 in the same group of patients.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>27298113</pmid><doi>10.1111/jhn.12376</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0952-3871 |
| ispartof | Journal of human nutrition and dietetics, 2016-12, Vol.29 (6), p.704-713 |
| issn | 0952-3871 1365-277X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1850780764 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
| subjects | Aged Aged, 80 and over Agreements clinical nutrition Female Geriatric Assessment - methods Geriatrics Humans Inpatients Male Malnutrition Malnutrition - diagnosis Mass Screening - methods Nutrition Assessment nutrition screening nutritional assessment Risk Assessment - methods |
| title | Evaluation of the nutritional status of older hospitalised geriatric patients: a comparative analysis of a Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) version and the Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS 2002) |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T09%3A10%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20the%20nutritional%20status%20of%20older%20hospitalised%20geriatric%20patients:%20a%20comparative%20analysis%20of%20a%20Mini%20Nutritional%20Assessment%20(MNA)%20version%20and%20the%20Nutritional%20Risk%20Screening%20(NRS%202002)&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20human%20nutrition%20and%20dietetics&rft.au=Christner,%20S.&rft.date=2016-12&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=704&rft.epage=713&rft.pages=704-713&rft.issn=0952-3871&rft.eissn=1365-277X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/jhn.12376&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1826697194%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1845023844&rft_id=info:pmid/27298113&rfr_iscdi=true |