Proceso INFORNUT: validación de la fase de filtro-FILNUT--y comparación con otros métodos de detección precoz de desnutrición hospitalaria.

INTRODUCTION According to several series, hospital hyponutrition involves 30-50% of hospitalized patients. The high prevalence justifies the need for early detection from admission. There several classical screening tools that show important limitations in their systematic application in daily clinical practice. OBJECTIVES To analyze the relationship between hyponutrition, detected by our screening method, and mortality, hospital stay, or re-admissions. To analyze, as well, the relationship between hyponutrition and prescription of nutritional support. To compare different nutritional screening methods at admission on a random sample of hospitalized patients. Validation of the INFORNUT method for nutritional screening. MATERIAL AND METHODS In a previous phase from the study design, a retrospective analysis with data from the year 2003 was carried out in order to know the situation of hyponutrition in Virgen de la Victoria Hospital, at Malaga, gathering data from the MBDS (Minimal Basic Data Set), laboratory analysis of nutritional risk (FILNUT filter), and prescription of nutritional support. In the experimental phase, a cross-sectional cohort study was done with a random sample of 255 patients, on May of 2004. Anthropometrical study, Subjective Global Assessment (SGA), Mini-Nutritional Assessment (MNA), Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS), Gassull's method, CONUT and INFORNUT were done. The settings of the INFORNUT filter were: albumin < 3.5 g/dL, and/or total proteins <5 g/dL, and/or prealbumin <18 mg/dL, with or without total lymphocyte count < 1.600 cells/mm3 and/or total cholesterol <180 mg/dL. In order to compare the different methods, a gold standard is created based on the recommendations of the SENPE on anthropometrical and laboratory data. The statistical association analysis was done by the chi-squared test (a: 0.05) and agreement by the k index. RESULTS In the study performed in the previous phase, it is observed that the prevalence of hospital hyponutrition is 53.9%. One thousand six hundred and forty four patients received nutritional support, of which 66.9% suffered from hyponutrition. We also observed that hyponutrition is one of the factors favoring the increase in mortality (hyponourished patients 15.19% vs. non-hyponourished 2.58%), hospital stay (hyponourished patients 20.95 days vs. non-hyponourished 8.75 days), and re-admissions (hyponourished patients 14.30% vs. non-hyponourished 6%). The results from the experimental study are as follows: the prevalence of hyponutrition obtained by the gold standard was 61%, INFORNUT 60%. Agreement levels between INFORNUT, CONUT, and GASSULL are good or very good between them (k: 0.67 INFORNUT with CONUT, and k: 0.94 INFORNUT and GASSULL) and wit the gold standard (k: 0.83; k: 0.64 CONUT; k: 0.89 GASSULL). However, structured tests (SGA, MNA, NRS) show low agreement indexes with the gold standard and laboratory or mixed tests (Gassull), although they show a low to intermediate level of agreement when compared one to each other (k: 0.489 NRS with SGA). INFORNUT shows sensitivity of 92.3%, a positive predictive value of 94.1%, and specificity of 91.2%. After the filer phase, a preliminary report is sent, on which anthropometrical and intake data are added and a Nutritional Risk Report is done. CONCLUSIONS Hyponutrition prevalence in our study (60%) is similar to that found by other authors. Hyponutrition is associated to increased mortality, hospital stay, and re-admission rate. There are no tools that have proven to be effective to show early hyponutrition at the hospital setting without important applicability limitations. FILNUT, as the first phase of the filter process of INFORNUT represents a valid tool: it has sensitivity and specificity for nutritional screening at admission. The main advantages of the process would be early detection of patients with risk for hyponutrition, having a teaching and sensitization function to health care staff implicating them in nutritional assessment of their patients, and doing a hyponutrition diagnosis and nutritional support need in the discharge report that would be registered by the Clinical Documentation Department. Therefore, INFORNUT would be a universal screening method with a good cost-effectiveness ratio.

Infornut® Process; improves accessibility to diagnosis and nutritional support for the malnourished hospitalized patient; impact on management indicators; two-year assessment.

Introduction: The high prevalence of disease-related hospital malnutrition justifies the need for screening tools and early detection in patients at risk for malnutrition, followed by an assessment targeted towards diagnosis and treatment. At the same time there is clear undercoding of malnutrition diagnoses and the procedures to correct it Objectives: To describe the INFORNUT program/ process and its development as an information system. To quantify performance in its different phases. To cite other tools used as a coding source. To calculate the coding rates for malnutrition diagnoses and related procedures. To show the relationship to Mean Stay, Mortality Rate and Urgent Readmission; as well as to quantify its impact on the hospital Complexity Index and its effect on the justification of Hospitalization Costs. Material and methods: The INFORNUT® process is based on an automated screening program of systematic detection and early identification of malnourished patients on hospital admission, as well as their assessment, diagnoses, documentation and reporting. Of total readmissions with stays longer than three days incurred in 2008 and 2010, we recorded patients who underwent analytical screening with an alert for a medium or high risk of malnutrition, as well as the subgroup of patients in whom we were able to administer the complete INFORNUT® process, generating a report for each.

Clinical intervals and diagnostic characteristics in a cohort of prostate cancer patients in Spain: a multicentre observational study.

BACKGROUND Little is known about the healthcare process for patients with prostate cancer, mainly because hospital-based data are not routinely published. The main objective of this study was to determine the clinical characteristics of prostate cancer patients, the, diagnostic process and the factors that might influence intervals from consultation to diagnosis and from diagnosis to treatment. METHODS We conducted a multicentre, cohort study in seven hospitals in Spain. Patients' characteristics and diagnostic and therapeutic variables were obtained from hospital records and patients' structured interviews from October 2010 to September 2011. We used a multilevel logistic regression model to examine the association between patient care intervals and various variables influencing these intervals (age, BMI, educational level, ECOG, first specialist consultation, tumour stage, PSA, Gleason score, and presence of symptoms) and calculated the odds ratio (OR) and the interquartile range (IQR). To estimate the random inter-hospital variability, we used the median odds ratio (MOR). RESULTS 470 patients with prostate cancer were included. Mean age was 67.8 (SD: 7.6) years and 75.4 % were physically active. Tumour size was classified as T1 in 41.0 % and as T2 in 40 % of patients, their median Gleason score was 6.0 (IQR:1.0), and 36.1 % had low risk cancer according to the D'Amico classification. The median interval between first consultation and diagnosis was 89 days (IQR:123.5) with no statistically significant variability between centres. Presence of symptoms was associated with a significantly longer interval between first consultation and diagnosis than no symptoms (OR:1.93, 95%CI 1.29-2.89). The median time between diagnosis and first treatment (therapeutic interval) was 75.0 days (IQR:78.0) and significant variability between centres was found (MOR:2.16, 95%CI 1.45-4.87). This interval was shorter in patients with a high PSA value (p = 0.012) and a high Gleason score (p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS Most incident prostate cancer patients in Spain are diagnosed at an early stage of an adenocarcinoma. The period to complete the diagnostic process is approximately three months whereas the therapeutic intervals vary among centres and are shorter for patients with a worse prognosis. The presence of prostatic symptoms, PSA level, and Gleason score influence all the clinical intervals differently.