E Dent1, R Visvanathan, C Piantadosi, I Chapman. 1. BAppSc (Hons), University of Adelaide, Department of Medicine, The Basil Hetzel Institute for Medical Research, 28 Woodville Road, Woodville South, SA, 5011. elsa.dent@adelaide.edu.au
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to: (1) determine the prevalence of undernutrition and frailty in hospitalised elderly patients and (2) evaluate the efficacy of both the Mini-Nutritional Assessment (MNA) screening tool and the MNA short form (MNA-SF) in identifying frailty. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A convenient sample of 100 consecutive patients (75.0 % female) admitted to the Geriatric Evaluation and Management Unit (GEMU) at The Queen Elizabeth Hospital in South Australia. MEASUREMENTS: Frailty status was determined using Fried's frailty criteria and nutritional status by the MNA and MNA-SF. Optimal cut-off scores to predict frailty were determined by Youden's Index, Receiver Operator Curves (ROC) and area under curve (AUC). RESULTS: Undernutrition was common. Using the MNA, 40.0% of patients were malnourished and 44.0% were at risk of malnutrition. By Fried's classification, 66.0 % were frail, 30.0 % were pre-frail and 4.0 % robust. The MNA had a specificity of 0.912 and a sensitivity of 0.516 in predicting frailty using the recommended cut-off for malnourishment (< 17). The optimal MNA cut-off for frailty screening was <17.5 with a specificity of 0.912 and sensitivity of 0.591. The MNA-SF predicted frailty with specificity and sensitivity values of 0.794 and 0.636 respectively, using the standard cut-off of < 8. The optimal MNA-SF cut-off score for frailty was < 9, with specificity and sensitivity values of 0.765 and 0.803 respectively and was better than the optimum MNA cut-off in predicting frailty (Youden Index 0.568 vs. 0.503). CONCLUSION: The quickly and easily administered MNA-SF appears to be a good tool for predicting both under-nutrition and frailty in elderly hospitalised people. Further studies would show whether the MNA-SF could also detect frailty in other populations of older people.
OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to: (1) determine the prevalence of undernutrition and frailty in hospitalised elderly patients and (2) evaluate the efficacy of both the Mini-Nutritional Assessment (MNA) screening tool and the MNA short form (MNA-SF) in identifying frailty. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A convenient sample of 100 consecutive patients (75.0 % female) admitted to the Geriatric Evaluation and Management Unit (GEMU) at The Queen Elizabeth Hospital in South Australia. MEASUREMENTS: Frailty status was determined using Fried's frailty criteria and nutritional status by the MNA and MNA-SF. Optimal cut-off scores to predict frailty were determined by Youden's Index, Receiver Operator Curves (ROC) and area under curve (AUC). RESULTS: Undernutrition was common. Using the MNA, 40.0% of patients were malnourished and 44.0% were at risk of malnutrition. By Fried's classification, 66.0 % were frail, 30.0 % were pre-frail and 4.0 % robust. The MNA had a specificity of 0.912 and a sensitivity of 0.516 in predicting frailty using the recommended cut-off for malnourishment (< 17). The optimal MNA cut-off for frailty screening was <17.5 with a specificity of 0.912 and sensitivity of 0.591. The MNA-SF predicted frailty with specificity and sensitivity values of 0.794 and 0.636 respectively, using the standard cut-off of < 8. The optimal MNA-SF cut-off score for frailty was < 9, with specificity and sensitivity values of 0.765 and 0.803 respectively and was better than the optimum MNA cut-off in predicting frailty (Youden Index 0.568 vs. 0.503). CONCLUSION: The quickly and easily administered MNA-SF appears to be a good tool for predicting both under-nutrition and frailty in elderly hospitalised people. Further studies would show whether the MNA-SF could also detect frailty in other populations of older people.
Authors: Karen Bandeen-Roche; Qian-Li Xue; Luigi Ferrucci; Jeremy Walston; Jack M Guralnik; Paulo Chaves; Scott L Zeger; Linda P Fried Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: L P Fried; C M Tangen; J Walston; A B Newman; C Hirsch; J Gottdiener; T Seeman; R Tracy; W J Kop; G Burke; M A McBurnie Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: B Vellas; H Villars; G Abellan; M E Soto; Y Rolland; Y Guigoz; J E Morley; W Chumlea; A Salva; L Z Rubenstein; P Garry Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2006 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: G Abellan van Kan; Y Rolland; H Bergman; J E Morley; S B Kritchevsky; B Vellas Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Peggy M Cawthon; Lynn M Marshall; Yvonne Michael; Thuy-Tien Dam; Kristine E Ensrud; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor; Eric S Orwoll Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Kenneth E Covinsky; Robert M Palmer; Richard H Fortinsky; Steven R Counsell; Anita L Stewart; Denise Kresevic; Christopher J Burant; C Seth Landefeld Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Barbara Caecilia Wimmer; Elsa Dent; Renuka Visvanathan; Michael David Wiese; Kristina Johnell; Ian Chapman; J Simon Bell Journal: Drugs Aging Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 3.923
Authors: M S Zukeran; R M Ritti-Dias; F G M Franco; M S Cendoroglo; L D N de Matos; S M Lima Ribeiro Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2019 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: P de Boissieu; R Mahmoudi; M Hentzien; S Toquet; J-L Novella; F Blanchard; D Jolly; M Dramé Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 4.075