确定筛查癌症患者营养不良的有效工具:与患者主观整体评估(PG-SGA)的比较

S. Susetyowati, Rizka Maulida Sarasati, Farah Rizqi, Nadira D'mas Getare Sanubari, Atikah Nuraini
{"title":"确定筛查癌症患者营养不良的有效工具:与患者主观整体评估(PG-SGA)的比较","authors":"S. Susetyowati, Rizka Maulida Sarasati, Farah Rizqi, Nadira D'mas Getare Sanubari, Atikah Nuraini","doi":"10.14710/jgi.11.1.49-56","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Nutrition screening tools are necessary to predict the risk of malnutrition for cancer patients. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the validity of nutrition screening tools in identifying malnutrition among cancer patients.Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study involved 175 oncology patients in Dr. Sardjito General Hospital. Malnutrition risk of participants was screened using Nutrition Risk Screening (NRS) 2002, Simple Nutrition Screening Tool (SNST), Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST), Nutriscore, and the Royal Marsden Nutrition Screening Tool (RMNST). Patient Generated-Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) was used as a gold standard. Nutritional assessments, including Body Mass Index (BMI), Mid-Upper Arm Circumference (MUAC), albumin, hemoglobin, Total Leucocytes Count (TLC), and Hand Grip Strength (HGS), were used to evaluate nutritional status.Results: The NRS 2002, SNST, MST, Nutriscore and RMNST identified nutritional risk in 64.6%; 58.9%; 49.1%; 30.3%; 84.6%, respectively. The SNST obtained the highest level of AUC discrimination (0.8) compared to NRS 2002 (0.7); MST (0.7); Nutriscore (0.7); and RMNST (0.7). There was a significant association between nutrition screening with nutritional parameters except for TLC (P>0.005). Patients who were at risk of malnutrition had a lower average of objective assessment tools.Conclusion: All the nutritional screenings were valid to screen for malnutrition risk among cancer patients. Nutritional screening has a strong correlation with nutritional assessment. The lower risk detected by nutrition screening, the poorer the nutrition status measured by nutrition assessments. ","PeriodicalId":32498,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Gizi Indonesia The Indonesian Journal of Nutrition","volume":"49 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Determining the Valid Tools to Screen Malnutrition in Cancer Patients: A Comparison to Patient Generated-Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA)\",\"authors\":\"S. Susetyowati, Rizka Maulida Sarasati, Farah Rizqi, Nadira D'mas Getare Sanubari, Atikah Nuraini\",\"doi\":\"10.14710/jgi.11.1.49-56\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Nutrition screening tools are necessary to predict the risk of malnutrition for cancer patients. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the validity of nutrition screening tools in identifying malnutrition among cancer patients.Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study involved 175 oncology patients in Dr. Sardjito General Hospital. Malnutrition risk of participants was screened using Nutrition Risk Screening (NRS) 2002, Simple Nutrition Screening Tool (SNST), Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST), Nutriscore, and the Royal Marsden Nutrition Screening Tool (RMNST). Patient Generated-Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) was used as a gold standard. Nutritional assessments, including Body Mass Index (BMI), Mid-Upper Arm Circumference (MUAC), albumin, hemoglobin, Total Leucocytes Count (TLC), and Hand Grip Strength (HGS), were used to evaluate nutritional status.Results: The NRS 2002, SNST, MST, Nutriscore and RMNST identified nutritional risk in 64.6%; 58.9%; 49.1%; 30.3%; 84.6%, respectively. The SNST obtained the highest level of AUC discrimination (0.8) compared to NRS 2002 (0.7); MST (0.7); Nutriscore (0.7); and RMNST (0.7). There was a significant association between nutrition screening with nutritional parameters except for TLC (P>0.005). Patients who were at risk of malnutrition had a lower average of objective assessment tools.Conclusion: All the nutritional screenings were valid to screen for malnutrition risk among cancer patients. Nutritional screening has a strong correlation with nutritional assessment. The lower risk detected by nutrition screening, the poorer the nutrition status measured by nutrition assessments. \",\"PeriodicalId\":32498,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jurnal Gizi Indonesia The Indonesian Journal of Nutrition\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jurnal Gizi Indonesia The Indonesian Journal of Nutrition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14710/jgi.11.1.49-56\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Gizi Indonesia The Indonesian Journal of Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14710/jgi.11.1.49-56","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:营养筛查工具是预测癌症患者营养不良风险的必要手段。目的:本研究旨在探讨营养筛查工具在鉴别癌症患者营养不良方面的有效性。材料和方法:这项横断面研究包括175名Sardjito博士综合医院的肿瘤患者。采用营养风险筛查(NRS) 2002、简单营养筛查工具(SNST)、营养不良筛查工具(MST)、Nutriscore和皇家马斯登营养筛查工具(RMNST)对参与者进行营养不良风险筛查。采用患者主观整体评估(PG-SGA)作为金标准。营养评估,包括身体质量指数(BMI)、中上臂围(MUAC)、白蛋白、血红蛋白、总白细胞计数(TLC)和握力(HGS),用于评估营养状况。结果:NRS 2002、SNST、MST、Nutriscore和RMNST对营养风险的识别率为64.6%;58.9%;49.1%;30.3%;84.6%,分别。SNST的AUC辨别水平(0.8)高于NRS 2002 (0.7);MST (0.7);Nutriscore (0.7);RMNST(0.7)。除TLC外,营养筛查与其他营养参数均有显著相关性(P>0.005)。有营养不良风险的患者使用客观评估工具的平均值较低。结论:所有营养筛查均可有效筛查癌症患者的营养不良风险。营养筛查与营养评估有很强的相关性。营养筛查发现的风险越低,营养评估测量的营养状况就越差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Determining the Valid Tools to Screen Malnutrition in Cancer Patients: A Comparison to Patient Generated-Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA)
Background: Nutrition screening tools are necessary to predict the risk of malnutrition for cancer patients. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the validity of nutrition screening tools in identifying malnutrition among cancer patients.Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study involved 175 oncology patients in Dr. Sardjito General Hospital. Malnutrition risk of participants was screened using Nutrition Risk Screening (NRS) 2002, Simple Nutrition Screening Tool (SNST), Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST), Nutriscore, and the Royal Marsden Nutrition Screening Tool (RMNST). Patient Generated-Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) was used as a gold standard. Nutritional assessments, including Body Mass Index (BMI), Mid-Upper Arm Circumference (MUAC), albumin, hemoglobin, Total Leucocytes Count (TLC), and Hand Grip Strength (HGS), were used to evaluate nutritional status.Results: The NRS 2002, SNST, MST, Nutriscore and RMNST identified nutritional risk in 64.6%; 58.9%; 49.1%; 30.3%; 84.6%, respectively. The SNST obtained the highest level of AUC discrimination (0.8) compared to NRS 2002 (0.7); MST (0.7); Nutriscore (0.7); and RMNST (0.7). There was a significant association between nutrition screening with nutritional parameters except for TLC (P>0.005). Patients who were at risk of malnutrition had a lower average of objective assessment tools.Conclusion: All the nutritional screenings were valid to screen for malnutrition risk among cancer patients. Nutritional screening has a strong correlation with nutritional assessment. The lower risk detected by nutrition screening, the poorer the nutrition status measured by nutrition assessments. 
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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