BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The elevated prevalence figures of hyponutrition in hospitalized patients--near 40%--is an issue of concern. This allows deducing that early identification of malnourished, or at risk for hyponutrition, patients by means of effective nutritional assessment methods may represent an essential tool for nutritional planning. The aim of this study was applying to a same group of patients different nutritional assessment methods (objective and subjective) at the time of hospital admission in order to assess the degree of effectiveness for its clinical application. SETTING, PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: A prospective randomized study is designed, in which 50 admitted patients of our hospital are included between October 1st and December 31st of 2004, 9 of them being rejected for laboratory errors. During the first 3 days of hospital staying, anthropometrics (weight, height, arm circumference, and tricipital fold measure), biochemistry (full blood count, albumin, pre-albumin, retinol-bound protein, transferrin, and cholesterol), two nutritional assessment questionnaires (Global Subjective Assessment (GSA) and Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). RESULTS: Thechi-squared2 test has been applied to compare the results obtained from the different objective methods, separately and globally, with the MNA and GSA questionnaires, establishing the following anthropometrical comparisons: anthropometrics/MNA, Biochemistry/MNA, Chang/MNA, anthropometrics/GSA, Biochemistry/GSA, Chang/GSA, and MNA/GSA. Statistical significance has been set at p < 0.05. Statistical analysis has been done with the SPSS v.11 software. We have not observed a statistical significance between any of the three objective parameters studied: biochemistry, anthropometrics and immunology separately considered in the two nutritional assessment questionnaires. However, the significance is positive when we relate the results obtained by the Chang method, which comprises the three types of objective parameters, with those from the MNA and GSA. A statistical significance was also reached when relating both subjective methods between each other: MNA and GSA. CONCLUSIONS: Both the GSA and MNA represent a good indicator to determine high-risk patients for developing complications attributable to hyponutrition. We can attribute them a predictive power similar to that of objective data considered as a whole.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The elevated prevalence figures of hyponutrition in hospitalized patients--near 40%--is an issue of concern. This allows deducing that early identification of malnourished, or at risk for hyponutrition, patients by means of effective nutritional assessment methods may represent an essential tool for nutritional planning. The aim of this study was applying to a same group of patients different nutritional assessment methods (objective and subjective) at the time of hospital admission in order to assess the degree of effectiveness for its clinical application. SETTING, PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: A prospective randomized study is designed, in which 50 admitted patients of our hospital are included between October 1st and December 31st of 2004, 9 of them being rejected for laboratory errors. During the first 3 days of hospital staying, anthropometrics (weight, height, arm circumference, and tricipital fold measure), biochemistry (full blood count, albumin, pre-albumin, retinol-bound protein, transferrin, and cholesterol), two nutritional assessment questionnaires (Global Subjective Assessment (GSA) and Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). RESULTS: Thechi-squared2 test has been applied to compare the results obtained from the different objective methods, separately and globally, with the MNA and GSA questionnaires, establishing the following anthropometrical comparisons: anthropometrics/MNA, Biochemistry/MNA, Chang/MNA, anthropometrics/GSA, Biochemistry/GSA, Chang/GSA, and MNA/GSA. Statistical significance has been set at p < 0.05. Statistical analysis has been done with the SPSS v.11 software. We have not observed a statistical significance between any of the three objective parameters studied: biochemistry, anthropometrics and immunology separately considered in the two nutritional assessment questionnaires. However, the significance is positive when we relate the results obtained by the Chang method, which comprises the three types of objective parameters, with those from the MNA and GSA. A statistical significance was also reached when relating both subjective methods between each other: MNA and GSA. CONCLUSIONS: Both the GSA and MNA represent a good indicator to determine high-risk patients for developing complications attributable to hyponutrition. We can attribute them a predictive power similar to that of objective data considered as a whole.