Cargando…
Nutritional risk screening in a Danish university hospital is insufficient and may underestimate nutritional risk: A cross‐sectional study
BACKGROUND: Disease‐related‐malnutrition predicts poor clinical outcomes in elderly patients, and screening is pivotal for identifying patients at nutritional risk. The present study aimed to investigate nutrition screening rates in electronic patient records and validate the scores given. A seconda...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10084170/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35509207 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jhn.13025 |
_version_ | 1785021681073389568 |
---|---|
author | Thomsen, Tina Krogh Pedersen, Jette Lindegaard Sloth, Bente Damsgaard, Else Marie Rud, Charlotte Lock Hvas, Christian Lodberg |
author_facet | Thomsen, Tina Krogh Pedersen, Jette Lindegaard Sloth, Bente Damsgaard, Else Marie Rud, Charlotte Lock Hvas, Christian Lodberg |
author_sort | Thomsen, Tina Krogh |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Disease‐related‐malnutrition predicts poor clinical outcomes in elderly patients, and screening is pivotal for identifying patients at nutritional risk. The present study aimed to investigate nutrition screening rates in electronic patient records and validate the scores given. A secondary aim was to investigate whether the proportion of patients at risk differed between patients where screening was documented and those where no screening was documented. METHODS: This cross‐sectional observational study was conducted in a Danish university hospital during November 2020. Patients aged 65 years or more admitted to a medical department were included. The Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 (NRS‐2002) tool was used to identify patients at nutritional risk, both in routine clinical care, where data were collected retrospectively, and during a validation process in a random patient sample, where data were collected prospectively. RESULTS: In total, 817 patients were admitted for more than 24 h. Of these, an NRS‐2002 score was documented in 294 (36%), among whom 177 (60%) were at nutritional risk. In 146 patients where no score was documented, 88 (60%) were at risk. Validation was possible in 91 patients where a record‐based score and a validated score were documented. The specificity of the record‐based score was 100%, whereas the sensitivity was 75%, indicating that routine screening underestimated nutritional risk (p < 0.001, proportion difference 19%; 95% confidence interval = 10%–28%). CONCLUSIONS: Electronic documentation does not solve issues about compliance with nutritional risk screening. In patients where screening was not documented, the occurrence of nutritional risk was similar, indicating that omission of screening is not related to the score. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10084170 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100841702023-04-11 Nutritional risk screening in a Danish university hospital is insufficient and may underestimate nutritional risk: A cross‐sectional study Thomsen, Tina Krogh Pedersen, Jette Lindegaard Sloth, Bente Damsgaard, Else Marie Rud, Charlotte Lock Hvas, Christian Lodberg J Hum Nutr Diet Nutritional Support and Assessment BACKGROUND: Disease‐related‐malnutrition predicts poor clinical outcomes in elderly patients, and screening is pivotal for identifying patients at nutritional risk. The present study aimed to investigate nutrition screening rates in electronic patient records and validate the scores given. A secondary aim was to investigate whether the proportion of patients at risk differed between patients where screening was documented and those where no screening was documented. METHODS: This cross‐sectional observational study was conducted in a Danish university hospital during November 2020. Patients aged 65 years or more admitted to a medical department were included. The Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 (NRS‐2002) tool was used to identify patients at nutritional risk, both in routine clinical care, where data were collected retrospectively, and during a validation process in a random patient sample, where data were collected prospectively. RESULTS: In total, 817 patients were admitted for more than 24 h. Of these, an NRS‐2002 score was documented in 294 (36%), among whom 177 (60%) were at nutritional risk. In 146 patients where no score was documented, 88 (60%) were at risk. Validation was possible in 91 patients where a record‐based score and a validated score were documented. The specificity of the record‐based score was 100%, whereas the sensitivity was 75%, indicating that routine screening underestimated nutritional risk (p < 0.001, proportion difference 19%; 95% confidence interval = 10%–28%). CONCLUSIONS: Electronic documentation does not solve issues about compliance with nutritional risk screening. In patients where screening was not documented, the occurrence of nutritional risk was similar, indicating that omission of screening is not related to the score. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-05-18 2023-02 /pmc/articles/PMC10084170/ /pubmed/35509207 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jhn.13025 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Dietetic Association. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Nutritional Support and Assessment Thomsen, Tina Krogh Pedersen, Jette Lindegaard Sloth, Bente Damsgaard, Else Marie Rud, Charlotte Lock Hvas, Christian Lodberg Nutritional risk screening in a Danish university hospital is insufficient and may underestimate nutritional risk: A cross‐sectional study |
title | Nutritional risk screening in a Danish university hospital is insufficient and may underestimate nutritional risk: A cross‐sectional study |
title_full | Nutritional risk screening in a Danish university hospital is insufficient and may underestimate nutritional risk: A cross‐sectional study |
title_fullStr | Nutritional risk screening in a Danish university hospital is insufficient and may underestimate nutritional risk: A cross‐sectional study |
title_full_unstemmed | Nutritional risk screening in a Danish university hospital is insufficient and may underestimate nutritional risk: A cross‐sectional study |
title_short | Nutritional risk screening in a Danish university hospital is insufficient and may underestimate nutritional risk: A cross‐sectional study |
title_sort | nutritional risk screening in a danish university hospital is insufficient and may underestimate nutritional risk: a cross‐sectional study |
topic | Nutritional Support and Assessment |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10084170/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35509207 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jhn.13025 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT thomsentinakrogh nutritionalriskscreeninginadanishuniversityhospitalisinsufficientandmayunderestimatenutritionalriskacrosssectionalstudy AT pedersenjettelindegaard nutritionalriskscreeninginadanishuniversityhospitalisinsufficientandmayunderestimatenutritionalriskacrosssectionalstudy AT slothbente nutritionalriskscreeninginadanishuniversityhospitalisinsufficientandmayunderestimatenutritionalriskacrosssectionalstudy AT damsgaardelsemarie nutritionalriskscreeninginadanishuniversityhospitalisinsufficientandmayunderestimatenutritionalriskacrosssectionalstudy AT rudcharlottelock nutritionalriskscreeninginadanishuniversityhospitalisinsufficientandmayunderestimatenutritionalriskacrosssectionalstudy AT hvaschristianlodberg nutritionalriskscreeninginadanishuniversityhospitalisinsufficientandmayunderestimatenutritionalriskacrosssectionalstudy |