Suppr超能文献

在康复实践中纳入营养不良筛查工具和营养不良通用筛查工具:与营养不良风险筛查2002的比较。

Incorporating the Malnutrition Screening Tool and the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool in Rehabilitation Practice: Comparison With the Nutrition Risk Screening 2002.

作者信息

Tel Adigüzel Kübra, Çalişkan Hatice Aybüke, Işik Fatma Berna, Çaybaşi Erdoğan Hilal, Akşit Sena, Mansiz Suna, Adigüzel Emre, Yaşar Evren

机构信息

Gülhane Health Sciences Faculty, Department of Nutrition and Dietetics University of Health Sciences Turkey Ankara Turkey.

Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Hospital University of Health Sciences Turkey Ankara Turkey.

出版信息

Food Sci Nutr. 2025 Jan 9;13(1):e4676. doi: 10.1002/fsn3.4676. eCollection 2025 Jan.

Abstract

To demonstrate the prevalence of malnutrition risk in a specific rehabilitation setting. The secondary aim of the study was to compare Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST) and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) with Nutritional Risk Screening-2002 (NRS-2002). Patients diagnosed with stroke, anoxic brain injury, spinal cord injury, multiple sclerosis, arthritis, neuromuscular diseases, Parkinson's disease, and lymphedema who were admitted to a rehabilitation hospital were included. NRS-2002, MST, and MUST were used to assess malnutrition risk. Body weight (kg), height (cm), and mid upper arm circumference (cm) were measured. Twenty-four hours dietary records were obtained. Routine blood test results were recorded from patient files. Five hundred sixteen patients with a mean age of 54.3 ± 18.0 years were included. The most prominent diagnoses were stroke and spinal cord injury. According to NRS-2002, 71.7% ( = 370) of the patients were at low risk, but 28.3% ( = 146) of the patients were at high risk. Comparisons between NRS-2002 and MST showed that these two scales have similar results at classifying patients for malnutrition risk ( = 0.154). Comparison between NRS-2002 and MUST showed significant differences ( < 0.001). Both sensitivity and specificity of MST were above 80.0%. Sensitivity of MUST was 78.1% and specificity was 88.1%. Approximately one-third of the patients were at risk of malnutrition. Specificity and sensitivity of MST and MUST were as high as routinely used scale NRS-2002, and therefore it can be supposed that, considering the diagnostic groups of the patients, MST and MUST are useful in rehabilitation practice.

摘要

为了证明在特定康复环境中营养不良风险的普遍性。该研究的次要目的是将营养不良筛查工具(MST)和营养不良通用筛查工具(MUST)与营养风险筛查2002(NRS - 2002)进行比较。纳入了入住康复医院的被诊断为中风、缺氧性脑损伤、脊髓损伤、多发性硬化症、关节炎、神经肌肉疾病、帕金森病和淋巴水肿的患者。使用NRS - 2002、MST和MUST评估营养不良风险。测量了体重(kg)、身高(cm)和上臂中部周长(cm)。获取了24小时饮食记录。从患者病历中记录了常规血液检查结果。纳入了516名平均年龄为54.3±18.0岁的患者。最常见的诊断是中风和脊髓损伤。根据NRS - 2002,71.7%(n = 370)的患者为低风险,但28.3%(n = 146)的患者为高风险。NRS - 2002与MST之间的比较表明,这两种量表在对患者进行营养不良风险分类方面结果相似(P = 0.154)。NRS - 2002与MUST之间的比较显示出显著差异(P < 0.001)。MST的敏感性和特异性均高于80.0%。MUST的敏感性为78.1%,特异性为88.1%。大约三分之一的患者存在营养不良风险。MST和MUST的特异性和敏感性与常规使用的量表NRS - 2002一样高,因此可以推测,考虑到患者的诊断类别,MST和MUST在康复实践中是有用的。

相似文献

2
AIWW: a new nutrition-screening tool for the oncologic population.AIWW:一种用于肿瘤患者的新型营养筛查工具。
Sci China Life Sci. 2023 Aug;66(8):1831-1840. doi: 10.1007/s11427-022-2292-9. Epub 2023 Apr 28.

本文引用的文献

1
Malnutrition in Adults.成人营养不良
N Engl J Med. 2024 Jul 11;391(2):155-165. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra2212159.
2
The Impact of Malnutrition on Skin Integrity and Wound Healing.营养不良对皮肤完整性和伤口愈合的影响。
Adv Skin Wound Care. 2024 Mar 1;37(3):126-135. doi: 10.1097/ASW.0000000000000107.
6
Malnutrition Screening and Assessment.营养不良筛查和评估。
Nutrients. 2022 Jun 9;14(12):2392. doi: 10.3390/nu14122392.

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