• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

确定需要营养干预的重症退伍军人:比较营养风险工具的质量改进研究。

Identifying Critically Ill Veterans Who Require Nutrition Intervention: A Quality Improvement Study Comparing Nutrition Risk Tools.

机构信息

Nutrition and Food Services, James A. Haley Veterans' Hospital, Tampa, Florida, USA.

出版信息

Nutr Clin Pract. 2019 Jun;34(3):414-420. doi: 10.1002/ncp.10235. Epub 2019 Jan 15.

DOI:10.1002/ncp.10235
PMID:30644593
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Identification of intensive care unit (ICU) patients who require nutrition intervention is crucial to initiating nutrition therapy. This prospective quality improvement study evaluated the Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS) 2002, Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), and Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill (NUTRIC) score in comparison with the Veterans Administration Nutrition Status Classification (VANSC) tool to determine which best identified the need for nutrition intervention.

METHODS

A convenience sample of 150 ICU patients was evaluated using the VANSC, NRS 2002, MUST, and the NUTRIC score. The resultant score, need for nutrition intervention, and presence of malnutrition were recorded for patients. Interventions were defined as need for enteral or parenteral nutrition, nutritional supplements, or diet change. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC), F1 score, and accuracy to predict need for nutrition intervention were calculated for each screening tool.

RESULTS

Of the 150 patients, 49 (33%) required 1 or more nutrition interventions. The NRS 2002 (0.878) and VANSC (0.816) had the highest sensitivity. The NUTRIC (0.921) and VANSC (0.911) had the highest specificity. The VANSC (0.816) and MUST (0.687) had the highest PPV. The VANSC (0.911) and NRS 2002 (0.872) had the highest NPV. The VANSC (0.727) and MUST (0.528) had the highest MCC. The VANSC (0.816) and MUST (0.680) had the highest F1 score.

CONCLUSIONS

Trialing several tools to identify their efficacy and reliability individual setting may help determine the most appropriate tool to utilize for your patient population and specific goals.

摘要

背景

识别需要营养干预的重症监护病房(ICU)患者对于启动营养治疗至关重要。本前瞻性质量改进研究比较了营养风险筛查(NRS)2002、营养不良通用筛查工具(MUST)和危重患者营养风险(NUTRIC)评分与退伍军人事务部营养状况分类(VANSC)工具,以确定哪种方法最能确定营养干预的需求。

方法

使用 VANSC、NRS 2002、MUST 和 NUTRIC 评分对 150 例 ICU 患者进行了方便样本评估。记录患者的评分、营养干预需求和营养不良情况。干预措施定义为需要肠内或肠外营养、营养补充剂或饮食改变。计算了每种筛选工具预测营养干预需求的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值(NPV)、马修斯相关系数(MCC)、F1 评分和准确性。

结果

在 150 例患者中,有 49 例(33%)需要 1 种或多种营养干预。NRS 2002(0.878)和 VANSC(0.816)具有最高的敏感性。NUTRIC(0.921)和 VANSC(0.911)具有最高的特异性。VANSC(0.816)和 MUST(0.687)具有最高的 PPV。VANSC(0.911)和 NRS 2002(0.872)具有最高的 NPV。VANSC(0.727)和 MUST(0.528)具有最高的 MCC。VANSC(0.816)和 MUST(0.680)具有最高的 F1 评分。

结论

在个别设定中试用几种工具以确定其功效和可靠性可能有助于确定最适合用于患者人群和特定目标的最适当工具。

相似文献

1
Identifying Critically Ill Veterans Who Require Nutrition Intervention: A Quality Improvement Study Comparing Nutrition Risk Tools.确定需要营养干预的重症退伍军人:比较营养风险工具的质量改进研究。
Nutr Clin Pract. 2019 Jun;34(3):414-420. doi: 10.1002/ncp.10235. Epub 2019 Jan 15.
2
Comparison of nutritional screening and diagnostic tools in diagnosis of severe malnutrition in critically ill patients.比较营养筛查和诊断工具在重症患者严重营养不良诊断中的应用。
Clin Nutr. 2020 Nov;39(11):3419-3425. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2020.02.035. Epub 2020 Mar 6.
3
Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill Versus the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002: Are They Comparable for Assessing Risk of Malnutrition in Critically Ill Patients?危重症患者的营养风险与营养风险筛查 2002:它们在评估危重症患者营养风险方面是否具有可比性?
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019 Jan;43(1):81-87. doi: 10.1002/jpen.1181. Epub 2018 May 30.
4
Nutrition Risk Screening in Intensive Care Units: Agreement Between NUTRIC and NRS 2002 Tools.重症监护病房的营养风险筛查:NUTRIC 和 NRS 2002 工具之间的一致性。
Nutr Clin Pract. 2020 Jun;35(3):567-571. doi: 10.1002/ncp.10419. Epub 2019 Oct 10.
5
Identifying critically-ill patients who will benefit most from nutritional therapy: Further validation of the "modified NUTRIC" nutritional risk assessment tool.识别最能从营养治疗中获益的重症患者:“改良NUTRIC”营养风险评估工具的进一步验证
Clin Nutr. 2016 Feb;35(1):158-162. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2015.01.015. Epub 2015 Jan 28.
6
Comparison of Modified NUTRIC, NRS-2002, and MUST Scores in Iranian Critically Ill Patients Admitted to Intensive Care Units: A Prospective Cohort Study.伊朗重症监护病房患者改良 NUTRIC、NRS-2002 和 MUST 评分的比较:一项前瞻性队列研究。
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2021 Sep;45(7):1504-1513. doi: 10.1002/jpen.2031. Epub 2020 Dec 9.
7
Nutritional status of patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit: A comprehensive report from Iranian hospitals, 2018.重症监护病房住院患者的营养状况:来自伊朗医院的综合报告,2018 年。
J Crit Care. 2019 Dec;54:151-158. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.08.001. Epub 2019 Aug 6.
8
Use of 3 tools to assess nutrition risk in the intensive care unit.使用3种工具评估重症监护病房中的营养风险。
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2015 Jan;39(1):28-33. doi: 10.1177/0148607114532135. Epub 2014 Apr 18.
9
Education program on medical nutrition and length of stay of critically ill patients.医学营养教育计划与危重症患者住院时间。
Clin Nutr. 2013 Dec;32(6):1061-6. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2012.11.023. Epub 2012 Dec 5.
10
Prognostic Performance of NUTRIC Score in Quantifying Malnutrition Risk in the Critically Ill in Congruence With the Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis.NUTRIC 评分在与生物电阻抗分析相结合量化危重症患者营养风险方面的预后性能。
Nutr Clin Pract. 2020 Jun;35(3):559-566. doi: 10.1002/ncp.10440. Epub 2019 Nov 11.