Suppr超能文献

评估 GLIM 框架第一步中不同的筛查工具:门诊环境下中国癌症患者的横断面研究。

Evaluation of different screening tools as the first step of the GLIM framework: A cross-sectional study of Chinese cancer patients in an outpatient setting.

机构信息

Department of Day Oncology Unit, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Peking University Cancer Hospital, Beijing, China.

Department of Nutrition, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Peking University Cancer Hospital, Beijing, China.

出版信息

Nutr Clin Pract. 2024 Jun;39(3):702-713. doi: 10.1002/ncp.11103. Epub 2023 Dec 31.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Ambulatory cancer patients are at high risk of malnutrition. Multiple nutrition screening and assessment tools are used in the outpatient setting. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of different nutrition screening tools as the first step of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) framework in Chinese ambulatory cancer patients.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted in a tertiary hospital in China. Malnutrition diagnoses made by the GLIM framework using Malnutrition Screening Tool, Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool, Nutritional Risk Screening 2002, or short-form of Patient-Gernerated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) as the first step were compared with PG-SGA separately.

RESULTS

Of the 562 included patients, 31.0% were diagnosed with malnutrition (PG-SGA: B + C), and 12.6% were diagnosed with severe malnutrition (PG-SGA: C). As the screening tool in the first step of the GLIM framework, the short form of PG-SGA (PG-SGA SF) with a cutoff value of ≥2 performed best in diagnosing malnutrition, with good sensitivity (SE) (80.5% [73.6-85.9]) and specificity (SP) (98.4% [96.5-99.4]) and substantial accordance (κ = 0.826), whereas PG-SGA SF with a cutoff value of ≥4 performed best in diagnosing severe malnutrition, with fair SE (62.0% [49.6-73.0]), good SP (96.7% [94.6-98.1]) and moderate accordance (κ = 0.629).

CONCLUSION

Using PG-SGA as the standard, the GLIM framework using PG-SGA SF as the screening tool has good accordance with the PG-SGA regardless of severity grading. PG-SGA SF can be used as a valid screening tool in the GLIM framework.

摘要

背景

门诊癌症患者存在较高的营养不良风险。在门诊环境中,有多种营养筛查和评估工具被使用。本研究旨在评估不同营养筛查工具在中文门诊癌症患者中的应用效果,这些工具将作为全球营养不良倡议(GLIM)框架的第一步。

方法

这是一项在中国一家三级医院进行的横断面研究。采用营养不良筛查工具(MST)、营养不良通用筛查工具(MUST)、营养风险筛查 2002(NRS 2002)和简化版患者主观整体评估(PG-SGA)作为 GLIM 框架第一步的营养筛查工具,分别与 PG-SGA 进行比较。

结果

在纳入的 562 例患者中,31.0%被诊断为营养不良(PG-SGA:B+C),12.6%被诊断为严重营养不良(PG-SGA:C)。作为 GLIM 框架的第一步筛查工具,PG-SGA 简表(PG-SGA SF)的截断值为≥2 时,在诊断营养不良方面表现最佳,具有较好的敏感性(80.5%[73.6-85.9])和特异性(98.4%[96.5-99.4]),一致性较高(κ=0.826),而当 PG-SGA SF 的截断值为≥4 时,在诊断严重营养不良方面表现最佳,具有中等的敏感性(62.0%[49.6-73.0])、较好的特异性(96.7%[94.6-98.1])和中等一致性(κ=0.629)。

结论

以 PG-SGA 为标准,使用 PG-SGA SF 作为 GLIM 框架的筛查工具与 PG-SGA 具有较好的一致性,无论严重程度分级如何。PG-SGA SF 可以作为 GLIM 框架中的一种有效筛查工具。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验