Teixeira Adriana Fonseca, Viana Kátia Danielle Araújo Lourenço
University Hospital, Universidade Federal do Maranhão (UFMA), São Luís, MA, Brazil.
Department of Physiological Sciences, Universidade Federal do Maranhão (UFMA), São Luís, MA, Brazil.
J Pediatr (Rio J). 2016 Jul-Aug;92(4):343-52. doi: 10.1016/j.jped.2015.08.011. Epub 2016 Feb 6.
This systematic review aimed to verify the available scientific evidence on the clinical performance and diagnostic accuracy of nutritional screening tools in hospitalized pediatric patients.
A search was performed in the Medline (National Library of Medicine United States), LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences), PubMed (US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health), in the SCIELO (Scientific Electronic Library Online), through CAPES portal (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior), bases Scopus e Web of Science. The descriptors used in accordance with the Descriptors in Health Sciences (DeCS)/Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) list were "malnutrition", "screening", and "pediatrics", as well as the equivalent words in Portuguese.
The authors identified 270 articles published between 2004 and 2014. After applying the selection criteria, 35 were analyzed in full and eight articles were included in the systematic review. We evaluated the methodological quality of the studies using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS). Five nutritional screening tools in pediatrics were identified. Among these, the Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition in Pediatrics (STAMP) showed high sensitivity, almost perfect inter-rater agreement and between the screening and the reference standard; the Screening Tool Risk on Nutritional Status and Growth (STRONGkids) showed high sensitivity, lower percentage of specificity, substantial intra-rater agreement, and ease of use in clinical practice.
The studies included in this systematic review showed good performance of the nutritional screening tools in pediatrics, especially STRONGkids and STAMP. The authors emphasize the need to perform for more studies in this area. Only one tool was translated and adapted to the Brazilian pediatric population, and it is essential to carry out studies of tool adaptation and validation for this population.
本系统评价旨在验证有关住院儿科患者营养筛查工具的临床性能和诊断准确性的现有科学证据。
在以下数据库进行了检索:美国国立医学图书馆的Medline、拉丁美洲和加勒比卫生科学数据库LILACS、美国国立医学图书馆国立卫生研究院的PubMed、科学电子在线图书馆SCIELO,通过高等教育人员素质提升协调办公室(CAPES)门户、Scopus数据库和科学网。根据健康科学描述符(DeCS)/医学主题词表(MeSH)列表使用的描述符为“营养不良”“筛查”和“儿科学”,以及葡萄牙语中的等效词汇。
作者识别出2004年至2014年发表的270篇文章。应用选择标准后,对35篇文章进行了全文分析,8篇文章纳入系统评价。我们使用诊断准确性研究质量评估(QUADAS)评估研究的方法学质量。识别出五种儿科营养筛查工具。其中,儿科营养不良评估筛查工具(STAMP)显示出高敏感性、筛查与参考标准之间几乎完美的评分者间一致性;营养状况和生长风险筛查工具(STRONGkids)显示出高敏感性、较低的特异性百分比、评分者内实质一致性以及在临床实践中易于使用。
本系统评价纳入的研究表明,营养筛查工具在儿科表现良好,尤其是STRONGkids和STAMP。作者强调需要在该领域开展更多研究。只有一种工具被翻译并适用于巴西儿科人群,对该人群进行工具改编和验证的研究至关重要。