Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia.
Department of Paediatrics, University Medical Centre Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia.
BMJ Open. 2019 May 27;9(5):e025444. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025444.
The aim of the present study was to identify all currently available screening and assessment tools for detection of malnutrition in hospitalised children, and to identify the most useful tools on the basis of published validation studies.
Systematic review.
PubMed, CINAHL and MEDLINE were searched up to October 2017.
Studies in English that reported sensitivity, specificity and positive/negative predictive values (PPVs/NPVs) in the paediatric population were eligible for inclusion.
Two authors independently screened all of the studies identified, and extracted the data. The methodological qualities of the studies included were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool.
The 26 validation studies that met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review used eight screening and three assessment tools. The number of participants varied from 32 to 14 477. There was considerable variability in the chosen reference standards, which prevented direct comparisons of the predictive performances of the tools. Anthropometric measurements were used as reference standards in 16 of the identified studies, and full nutritional assessment in 5. The Pediatric Yorkhill Malnutrition Score (PYMS) screening tool performed better than Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition and Screening Tool for Risk On Nutritional status and Growth when compared in terms of anthropometric measurements, especially for body mass index (Se=90.9, Sp=81.9) and triceps skinfold thickness (Se=80.0, Sp=75.0). However, low PPVs indicated the problem of overprediction of positive cases, which was typical for all of the studies that used anthropometric measurements as the reference standard.
This systematic review identifies the need for definition of the gold standard for validation of screening tools. Anthropometry measurements using WHO or Centers for Disease Control and Prevention growth charts should be considered as the possible reference standard in future validation studies. We would recommend the use of PYMS for hospitalised paediatric patients without chronic conditions, in combination with full nutritional assessment.
CRD42017077477.
本研究旨在确定所有目前可用于检测住院儿童营养不良的筛查和评估工具,并根据已发表的验证研究确定最有用的工具。
系统评价。
截至 2017 年 10 月,检索了 PubMed、CINAHL 和 MEDLINE。
符合纳入标准的研究需为英文报告,且需报告儿科人群的敏感性、特异性和阳性/阴性预测值(PPV/NPV)。
两名作者独立筛选所有确定的研究,并提取数据。使用诊断准确性研究质量评估工具 2 评估纳入研究的方法学质量。
共有 26 项符合本系统评价纳入标准的验证研究使用了 8 种筛查工具和 3 种评估工具。参与者人数从 32 人到 14477 人不等。所选择的参考标准差异较大,这使得工具的预测性能无法直接比较。在 16 项确定的研究中,使用人体测量学指标作为参考标准,5 项研究使用完整的营养评估。与人体测量学指标相比,儿科约克希尔营养不良评分(PYMS)筛查工具的表现优于营养不良筛查工具和营养状况和生长风险筛查工具,尤其是对于体重指数(Se=90.9,Sp=81.9)和三头肌皮褶厚度(Se=80.0,Sp=75.0)。然而,低 PPV 表明存在对阳性病例过度预测的问题,这在所有使用人体测量学指标作为参考标准的研究中都很典型。
本系统评价确定了需要定义验证筛查工具的金标准。未来的验证研究应考虑使用世界卫生组织或疾病控制和预防中心生长图表进行人体测量学指标,作为可能的参考标准。我们建议在没有慢性疾病的住院儿科患者中使用 PYMS,结合全面的营养评估。
PROSPERO 注册号:CRD42017077477。