{"title":"在对住院手术患者进行营养诊断时，GLIM 和 Nrs 标准是否一致？试点研究。","authors":"Larissa Silveira Stopiglia, Vânia Aparecida Leandro-Merhi","doi":"10.1590/S0004-2803.24612024-072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is no consensus on which nutritional diagnosis methods are most relevant in the hospital clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study investigated the agreement between the global leadership initiative on malnutrition (GLIM) criterion and the nutritional risk screening (NRS) instrument for the nutritional diagnosis of in-patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cross-sectional study with 95 hospitalized surgical patients. Clinical data, nutritional risk using the NRS and malnutrition using the GLIM criteria were evaluated. The data were analyzed using the chi-square, Mann-Whitney, McNemar and Kappa coefficient tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was good agreement between the two methods (Kappa=0.6067). Patients who were malnourished according to the GLIM or at nutritional risk by NRS were older (P=0.0461 by GLIM and P=0.0200 by NRS) and had a higher diagnosis rate of neoplasms (38.5%, P=0.0006 by GLIM and 32.7%, P=0.0030 by NRS). The GLIM criterion identified a lower percentage of patients with malnutrition (41.05%) in relation to the NRS regarding patients with nutritional risk (54.7%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The GLIM criteria and the NRS instrument are concordant methods for diagnosing malnutrition and nutritional risk in hospitalized surgical patients respectively.</p>","PeriodicalId":35671,"journal":{"name":"Arquivos de Gastroenterologia","volume":"61 ","pages":"e24072"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"IS THERE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GLIM AND THE NRS CRITERIA IN THE NUTRITIONAL DIAGNOSIS OF HOSPITALIZED SURGICAL PATIENTS? PILOT STUDY.\",\"authors\":\"Larissa Silveira Stopiglia, Vânia Aparecida Leandro-Merhi\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/S0004-2803.24612024-072\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is no consensus on which nutritional diagnosis methods are most relevant in the hospital clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study investigated the agreement between the global leadership initiative on malnutrition (GLIM) criterion and the nutritional risk screening (NRS) instrument for the nutritional diagnosis of in-patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cross-sectional study with 95 hospitalized surgical patients. Clinical data, nutritional risk using the NRS and malnutrition using the GLIM criteria were evaluated. The data were analyzed using the chi-square, Mann-Whitney, McNemar and Kappa coefficient tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was good agreement between the two methods (Kappa=0.6067). Patients who were malnourished according to the GLIM or at nutritional risk by NRS were older (P=0.0461 by GLIM and P=0.0200 by NRS) and had a higher diagnosis rate of neoplasms (38.5%, P=0.0006 by GLIM and 32.7%, P=0.0030 by NRS). The GLIM criterion identified a lower percentage of patients with malnutrition (41.05%) in relation to the NRS regarding patients with nutritional risk (54.7%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The GLIM criteria and the NRS instrument are concordant methods for diagnosing malnutrition and nutritional risk in hospitalized surgical patients respectively.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35671,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arquivos de Gastroenterologia\",\"volume\":\"61 \",\"pages\":\"e24072\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arquivos de Gastroenterologia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/S0004-2803.24612024-072\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arquivos de Gastroenterologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/S0004-2803.24612024-072","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
IS THERE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GLIM AND THE NRS CRITERIA IN THE NUTRITIONAL DIAGNOSIS OF HOSPITALIZED SURGICAL PATIENTS? PILOT STUDY.
Background: There is no consensus on which nutritional diagnosis methods are most relevant in the hospital clinical practice.
Objective: This study investigated the agreement between the global leadership initiative on malnutrition (GLIM) criterion and the nutritional risk screening (NRS) instrument for the nutritional diagnosis of in-patients.
Methods: Cross-sectional study with 95 hospitalized surgical patients. Clinical data, nutritional risk using the NRS and malnutrition using the GLIM criteria were evaluated. The data were analyzed using the chi-square, Mann-Whitney, McNemar and Kappa coefficient tests.
Results: There was good agreement between the two methods (Kappa=0.6067). Patients who were malnourished according to the GLIM or at nutritional risk by NRS were older (P=0.0461 by GLIM and P=0.0200 by NRS) and had a higher diagnosis rate of neoplasms (38.5%, P=0.0006 by GLIM and 32.7%, P=0.0030 by NRS). The GLIM criterion identified a lower percentage of patients with malnutrition (41.05%) in relation to the NRS regarding patients with nutritional risk (54.7%).
Conclusion: The GLIM criteria and the NRS instrument are concordant methods for diagnosing malnutrition and nutritional risk in hospitalized surgical patients respectively.
期刊介绍：
The journal Arquivos de Gastroenterologia (Archives of Gastroenterology), a quarterly journal, is the Official Publication of the Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia IBEPEGE (Brazilian Institute for Studies and Research in Gastroenterology), Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgia Digestiva - CBCD (Brazilian College of Digestive Surgery) and of the Sociedade Brasileira de Motilidade Digestiva - SBMD (Brazilian Digestive Motility Society). It is dedicated to the publishing of scientific papers by national and foreign researchers who are in agreement with the aim of the journal as well as with its editorial policies.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
