A Pilot Study To Compare Nutrition Screening Tools: Customized Nutrition Screening Tool for Burn Patients (Nstb) and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (Must).

Annals of burns and fire disasters Pub Date : 2022-12-31 eCollection Date: 2022-12-01
J Jose, N A Louri, N Al Jabbar, N Dey, M Showaiter, M Al Mannai, F K Ebrahim
{"title":"A Pilot Study To Compare Nutrition Screening Tools: Customized Nutrition Screening Tool for Burn Patients (Nstb) and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (Must).","authors":"J Jose, N A Louri, N Al Jabbar, N Dey, M Showaiter, M Al Mannai, F K Ebrahim","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Nutrition screening is an initial procedure in which the risk of malnutrition is identified. It plays a role in and can incur costs to health systems and patients. A customized nutrition screening tool for burn patients (NSTB) was formulated and the nutritional risk score of 22 patients from a burn unit in Bahrain using NSTB and MUST was compared. The samples selected were adult patients aged 18 years or over; pregnant and mentally retarded patients were excluded. Mean age of the total sample was 29.40, and 90.9% were male. Mean BMI was 26.96. The mean and SD for NSTB was 2.18±1.65, and for MUST 2.0±0.0. A difference in the nutritional screening risk score of the same group of patients was observed. In the MUST group, 100% patients were classified as high risk, while in the NSTB group 50% patients were classified as high risk, 36.36% as moderate risk and 13.63% as low risk respectively. The variability of the risk score in the NSTB group helps prioritize the patients based on high, medium, and low risk, whereas MUST categorizes all patients as high risk. A unique screening tool for burns will be more effective in determining risk patients due to tailor-made characteristics. Even though the data sample is small, the difference gives scope for extensive study.</p>","PeriodicalId":93873,"journal":{"name":"Annals of burns and fire disasters","volume":"35 4","pages":"265-271"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11041966/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of burns and fire disasters","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Nutrition screening is an initial procedure in which the risk of malnutrition is identified. It plays a role in and can incur costs to health systems and patients. A customized nutrition screening tool for burn patients (NSTB) was formulated and the nutritional risk score of 22 patients from a burn unit in Bahrain using NSTB and MUST was compared. The samples selected were adult patients aged 18 years or over; pregnant and mentally retarded patients were excluded. Mean age of the total sample was 29.40, and 90.9% were male. Mean BMI was 26.96. The mean and SD for NSTB was 2.18±1.65, and for MUST 2.0±0.0. A difference in the nutritional screening risk score of the same group of patients was observed. In the MUST group, 100% patients were classified as high risk, while in the NSTB group 50% patients were classified as high risk, 36.36% as moderate risk and 13.63% as low risk respectively. The variability of the risk score in the NSTB group helps prioritize the patients based on high, medium, and low risk, whereas MUST categorizes all patients as high risk. A unique screening tool for burns will be more effective in determining risk patients due to tailor-made characteristics. Even though the data sample is small, the difference gives scope for extensive study.

比较营养筛查工具的试点研究:烧伤患者定制营养筛查工具 (Nstb) 和营养不良通用筛查工具 (Must)。
营养筛查是确定营养不良风险的初始程序。营养筛查对医疗系统和患者都有影响,也会产生费用。我们为烧伤患者量身定制了营养筛查工具(NSTB),并使用 NSTB 和 MUST 对巴林烧伤科 22 名患者的营养风险评分进行了比较。所选样本均为 18 岁或以上的成年患者,不包括孕妇和智障患者。总样本的平均年龄为 29.40 岁,90.9% 为男性。平均体重指数为 26.96。NSTB 的平均值(2.18±1.65),MUST 的平均值(2.0±0.0)。同组患者的营养筛查风险评分存在差异。在 MUST 组中,100% 的患者被归类为高风险,而在 NSTB 组中,50% 的患者被归类为高风险,36.36% 的患者被归类为中度风险,13.63% 的患者被归类为低风险。NSTB 组风险评分的差异性有助于根据高、中、低风险对患者进行优先排序,而 MUST 则将所有患者归为高风险。针对烧伤的独特筛查工具因其量身定制的特点,将更有效地确定风险患者。尽管数据样本较小,但这种差异为广泛研究提供了空间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信