| Literature DB >> 35444266 |
Beatrice Gasperini1,2, Gilda Pelusi3, Annamaria Frascati4, Ilenia Carletta5, Franco Dolcini6, Donatella Sarti5, Emma Espinosa7, Emilia Prospero5.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Standardised nutritional screening methods improve the rate of recognising older patients with undernutrition, which is strongly encouraged in hospitals and residential settings. Therefore, our study compared the rates of identifying undernutrition before and after introducing the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA®) in a community hospital.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35444266 PMCID: PMC9019789 DOI: 10.1038/s41430-022-01145-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Clin Nutr ISSN: 0954-3007 Impact factor: 4.884
Total sample characteristics and before and after comparison of patients’ results.
| Total | Before | After | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Female, | 209 (66.1) | 153 (64.3) | 56 (71.8) | 0.224 |
| Age (years, mean ± SD) | 84.4 ± 7.6 | 84.6 ± 7.8 | 84.0 ± 7.2 | 0.601 |
| Urinary catheter, | 194 (61.4) | 150 (63.0) | 44 (56.4) | 0.289 |
| Vascular devices, | 129 (40.8) | 96 (40.3) | 33 (42.3) | 0.791 |
| Pressure sores, | 113 (35.8) | 80 (33.6) | 33 (42.3) | 0.164 |
| Nasogastric tube/PEG, | 37 (11.7) | 25 (10.5) | 12 (15.4) | 0.245 |
| Parenteral nutrition, | 21 (6.6) | 17 (7.1) | 4 (5.1) | 0.535 |
| Stoma, | 11 (3.5) | 9 (3.8) | 2 (2.6) | 0.611 |
| Conley score (mean ± SD) | 4.8 ± 2.5 | 4.7 ± 2.5 | 5.1 ± 2.5 | 0.199 |
| Norton Plus score (mean ± SD) | 10.2 ± 3.8 | 10.2 ± 3.7 | 10.3 ± 3.9 | 0.971 |
| Comorbidities, | ||||
| Cardiological | 264 (83.5) | 196 (82.4) | 68 (87.2) | 0.318 |
| Neuropsychiatric | 207 (65.5) | 160 (67.2) | 47 (60.3) | 0.261 |
| Pneumatological | 136 (43.0) | 106 (44.5) | 30 (38.5) | 0.347 |
| Orthopaedic | 105 (33.2) | 74 (31.1) | 31 (39.6) | 0.159 |
| Infectious | 81 (25.6) | 59 (24.8) | 22 (28.2) | 0.549 |
| Haematological | 46 (14.6) | 32 (13.4) | 14 (17.9) | 0.328 |
| Neoplastic | 43 (13.6) | 30 (12.6) | 13 (16.7) | 0.364 |
| Undernutrition, | ||||
| Not undernourished, | ||||
Statistically significant differences are reported in bold.
Fig. 1Comparison between the undernutrition frequencies observed was estimated using the MNA® and nursing diagnoses for patients admitted in 2020.
The set intersection shows undernourished subjects recognised using both nursing diagnoses and the MNA®.