Preoperative nutritional screening by the specialist instead of the nutritional risk score might prevent excess nutrition: a multivariate analysis of nutritional risk factors.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the current study was to assess whether widely used nutritional parameters are correlated with the nutritional risk score (NRS-2002) to identify postoperative morbidity and to evaluate the role of nutritionists in nutritional assessment. METHODS: A randomized trial on preoperative nutritional interventions (NCT00512213) provided the study cohort of 152 patients at nutritional risk (NRS-2002 ≥3) with a comprehensive phenotyping including diverse nutritional parameters (n=17), elaborated by nutritional specialists, and potential demographic and surgical (n=5) confounders. Risk factors for overall, severe (Dindo-Clavien 3-5) and infectious complications were identified by univariate analysis; parameters with P<0.20 were then entered in a multiple logistic regression model. RESULTS: Final analysis included 140 patients with complete datasets. Of these, 61 patients (43.6%) were overweight, and 72 patients (51.4%) experienced at least one complication of any degree of severity. Univariate analysis identified a correlation between few (≤3) active co-morbidities (OR=4.94; 95% CI: 1.47-16.56, p=0.01) and overall complications. Patients screened as being malnourished by nutritional specialists presented less overall complications compared to the not malnourished (OR=0.47; 95% CI: 0.22-0.97, p=0.043). Severe postoperative complications occurred more often in patients with low lean body mass (OR=1.06; 95% CI: 1-1.12, p=0.028). Few (≤3) active co-morbidities (OR=8.8; 95% CI: 1.12-68.99, p=0.008) were related with postoperative infections. Patients screened as being malnourished by nutritional specialists presented less infectious complications (OR=0.28; 95% CI: 0.1-0.78), p=0.014) as compared to the not malnourished. Multivariate analysis identified few co-morbidities (OR=6.33; 95% CI: 1.75-22.84, p=0.005), low weight loss (OR=1.08; 95% CI: 1.02-1.14, p=0.006) and low hemoglobin concentration (OR=2.84; 95% CI: 1.22-6.59, p=0.021) as independent risk factors for overall postoperative complications. Compliance with nutritional supplements (OR=0.37; 95% CI: 0.14-0.97, p=0.041) and supplementation of malnourished patients as assessed by nutritional specialists (OR=0.24; 95% CI: 0.08-0.69, p=0.009) were independently associated with decreased infectious complications. CONCLUSIONS: Nutritional support based upon NRS-2002 screening might result in overnutrition, with potentially deleterious clinical consequences. We emphasize the importance of detailed assessment of the nutritional status by a dedicated specialist before deciding on early nutritional intervention for patients with an initial NRS-2002 score of ≥3.

Nutritional screening and prevalence of hospital malnutrition risk. University Hospital of the UANL, Monterrey

Introduction: Hospital malnutrition risk has prevalence values of 20%-50%, and it is a major health problem in the health institutions worldwide. Objective: To assess the accomplishment of nutritional screening and the prevalence of hospital malnutrition risk in a University Hospital. Materials and methods: A retrospective analysis was carried out with nutritional screening, using primary data from six clinical areas obtained in the period between July 2012 and December 2013. According to previous results in Mexican health institutions and considering a mean malnutrition risk prevalence of 50%, it was calculated that a sample size of 3200 subjects was required for the assessment of valid risk values. Patients with values ≥3 on the Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS, 2002) were classiied as carriers of nutritional risk. Results: A total of 5611 patients (38% of all patients admitted) were studied. The rate of screening declined from 55% in 2012 to 31% in 2013. During the whole period, 3034 patients were classiied with risk of malnutrition (54% prevalence). Conclusions: The prevalence of hospital malnutrition risk was high. The accomplishment of the nutritional screening was deicient, and declined between 2012 and 2013. The lack of nutritional screening does not meet the vital care requirements of hospitalized patients and prevents the timely treatment of those at malnutrition risk.

Comparison of nutritional risk screening tools for predicting clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients

Objective: International nutritional screening tools are recommended for screening hospitalized patients for nutritional risk, but no tool has been specifically evaluated in the Brazilian population. The aim of this study was to identify the most appropriate nutritional screening tool for predicting unfavorable clinical outcomes in patients admitted to a Brazilian public university hospital. Methods: The Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002), Mini-Nutritional Assessment-Short Form (MNA-SF), and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) were administered to 705 patients within 48 h of hospital admission. Tool performance in predicting complications, very long length of hospital stay (LOS), and death was analyzed using receiver operating characteristic curves. Results: NRS 2002, MUST, and MNA-SF identified nutritional risk in 27.9%, 39.6%, and 73.2% of the patients, respectively. NRS 2002 (complications: 0.6531; very long LOS: 0.6508; death: 0.7948) and MNA-SF(complications: 0.6495; very long LOS: 0.6197; death: 0.7583) had largest areas under the ROC curve compared to MUST (complications: 0.6036; very long LOS: 0.6109; death: 0.6363). For elderly patients, NRS 2002 was not significantly different than MNA-SF (P>0.05) for predicting outcomes. Conclusion: Considering current criteria for nutritional risk, NRS 2002 and MNA-SF have similar performance to predict outcomes but NRS 2002 seems to provide a best yield. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Complementarity of Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) and Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002) for predicting poor clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients

Background & aims: We evaluated the ability of Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002) and Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) to predict malnutrition related to poor clinical outcomes. Methods: We assessed 705 patients at a public university hospital within 48 h of admission. Logistic regression and number needed to screen (NNS) were calculated to test the complementarity between the tools and their ability to predict very long length of hospital stay (VLLOS), complications, and death. Results: Of the patients screened, 27.9% were at nutritional risk (NRS+) and 38.9% were malnourished (SGA B or C). Compared to those patients not at nutritional risk, NRS+, SGA B or C patients were at increased risk for complications (p = 0.03, 0.02, and 0.003, respectively). NRS+ patients had an increased risk of death (p = 0.03), and SGA B and C patients had an increased likelihood of VLLOS (p = 0.008 and p < 0.0001, respectively). Patients who were both NRS+ and SGA C had lower estimates of NNS than patients who were NRS+ or SGA C only, though their confidence intervals did overlap. Conclusions: The concurrent application of SGA in NRS+ patients might enhance the ability to predict poor clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients in Brazil. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. All rights reserved.

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.

Validation of the Mini Nutritional Assessment short-form (MNA-SF): a practical tool for identification of nutritional status.

OBJECTIVE: To validate a revision of the Mini Nutritional Assessment short-form (MNA(R)-SF) against the full MNA, a standard tool for nutritional evaluation. METHODS: A literature search identified studies that used the MNA for nutritional screening in geriatric patients. The contacted authors submitted original datasets that were merged into a single database. Various combinations of the questions on the current MNA-SF were tested using this database through combination analysis and ROC based derivation of classification thresholds. RESULTS: Twenty-seven datasets (n=6257 participants) were initially processed from which twelve were used in the current analysis on a sample of 2032 study participants (mean age 82.3y) with complete information on all MNA items. The original MNA-SF was a combination of six questions from the full MNA. A revised MNA-SF included calf circumference (CC) substituted for BMI performed equally well. A revised three-category scoring classification for this revised MNA-SF, using BMI and/or CC, had good sensitivity compared to the full MNA. CONCLUSION: The newly revised MNA-SF is a valid nutritional screening tool applicable to geriatric health care professionals with the option of using CC when BMI cannot be calculated. This revised MNA-SF increases the applicability of this rapid screening tool in clinical practice through the inclusion of a "malnourished" category.

Use of the nutritional risk score by surgeons and nutritionists.

BACKGROUND: The Nutritional Risk Score (NRS) is a validated tool to identify patients who should benefit of nutritional interventions. Nutritional screening however has not yet been widely adopted by surgeons. Furthermore, the question about reliability of nutritional assessment performed by surgeons is still unanswered. METHODS: Data was obtained from a recent randomised trial including 146 patients with an NRS ≥3 as assessed by the surgeons. Additional detailed nutritional assessment was performed for all patients by nutritional specialists and entered prospectively in a dedicated database. In this retrospective, surgeons' scoring of NRS and its components was compared to the assessment by nutritionists (considered as gold standard). RESULTS: Prospective NRS scores by surgeons and nutritionists were available for 141 patients (97%). Surgeons calculated a NRS of 7, 6, 5, 4 and 3 in 2, 8, 38, 21 and 72 patients respectively. Nutritionists calculated a NRS of 6, 5, 4, 3 and 2 in 8, 26, 47, 57, 3 patients, respectively. Surgeons' assessment was entirely correct in 56 patients (40%), while at least the final score was consistent in 63 patients (45%). Surgeons overrated the NRS in 21% of patients and underestimated the score in 29%. Evaluation of the nutritional status showed most of the discrepancies (54%). CONCLUSION: Surgeon's assessment of nutritional status is modest at best. Close collaboration with nutritional specialists should be recommended in order to avoid misdiagnosis and under-treatment of patients at nutritional risk.

Perioperative nutrition is still a surgical orphan: results of a Swiss-Austrian survey.

Background/Objectives:There is strong evidence for the beneficial effects of perioperative nutrition in patients undergoing major surgery. We aimed to evaluate implementation of current guidelines in Switzerland and Austria.Subjects/Methods:A survey was conducted in 173 Swiss and Austrian surgical departments. We inquired about nutritional screening, perioperative nutrition and estimated clinical significance.Results:The overall response rate was 55%, having 69% (54/78) responders in Switzerland and 44% (42/95) in Austria. Most centres were aware of reduced complications (80%) and shorter hospital stay (59%). However, only 20% of them implemented routine nutritional screening. Non-compliance was because of financial (49%) and logistic restrictions (33%). Screening was mainly performed in the outpatient's clinic (52%) or during admission (54%). The nutritional risk score was applied by 14% only; instead, various clinical (78%) and laboratory parameters (56%) were used. Indication for perioperative nutrition was based on preoperative screening in 49%. Although 23% used preoperative nutrition, 68% applied nutritional support pre- and postoperatively. Preoperative nutritional treatment ranged from 3 days (33%), to 5 (31%) and even 7 days (20%).Conclusions:Although malnutrition is a well-recognised risk factor for poor post-operative outcome, surgeons remain reluctant to implement routine screening and nutritional support according to evidence-based guidelines.

Perioperative nutrition in abdominal surgery: recommendations and reality.

Introduction. Preoperative malnutrition is a major risk factor for increased postoperative morbidity and mortality. Definition and diagnosis of malnutrition and its treatment is still subject for controversy. Furthermore, practical implementation of nutrition-related guidelines is unknown. Methods. A review of the available literature and of current guidelines on perioperative nutrition was conducted. We focused on nutritional screening and perioperative nutrition in patients undergoing digestive surgery, and we assessed translation of recent guidelines in clinical practice. Results and Conclusions. Malnutrition is a well-recognized risk factor for poor postoperative outcome. The prevalence of malnutrition depends largely on its definition; about 40% of patients undergoing major surgery fulfil current diagnostic criteria of being at nutritional risk. The Nutritional Risk Score is a pragmatic and validated tool to identify patients who should benefit from nutritional support. Adequate nutritional intervention entails reduced (infectious) complications, hospital stay, and costs. Preoperative oral supplementation of a minimum of five days is preferable; depending on the patient and the type of surgery, immune-enhancing formulas are recommended. However, surgeons' compliance with evidence-based guidelines remains poor and efforts are necessary to implement routine nutritional screening and nutritional support.

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.

Perioperative nutrition is still a surgical orphan

Objective: To assess if screening programs and treatment of preoperative malnutrition have been implemented into surgical practice to decrease morbidity. There is strong evidence that postoperative morbidity can be minimized by early identifying and treating patients at nutritional risk before major surgery.The validated nutritional risk score (NRS) is recommended by the European Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition for nutritional screening. It remains unclear whether routine preoperative nutritional assessment and perioperative nutrition is widely implemented.Methods: A survey was conducted in 173 Swiss and Austrian surgical departments. Implementation of nutritional screening, perioperative nutrition, and estimated impact on clinical outcome were assessed. Non-responders were repeatedly contacted by the authors.Results: The overall response rate was 55%, whereby 69% (54/78) of Swiss and 44% (42/95) of Austrian centers responded. Despite 80% and 59% of the responding centers are aware of a reduced complication rate and shortened hospital stay, respectively, only 20% of them implemented routine nutritional screening. Financial (49%) and logistic restrictions (33%) are the predominant reasons against the routine clinical use. Screening is mainly performed either in the outpatient's clinic (52%) or during admission (54%). The NRS is only used by 14%. Instead, various clinical (78%), e.g. BMI and laboratory findings (56%), e.g. albumine, are used. Indication for perioperative nutrition is based on preoperative screening in 49%.While 23% use preoperative nutrition, 68% apply nutritional support pre- and postoperatively. Preoperative nutritional treatment ranged from three days (33%), to five days (31%) and even seven days (20%).Conclusion: Despite malnutrition is well recognized as major risk factor for increased postoperative morbidity, the majority of surgeons are reluctant to implement routine screening and nutritional support. If nutritional assessment is performed, local institutional screening parameters are still preferred. It remains difficult to overcome traditions, and to change surgeon's mind.

Multidisciplinary consensus on the approach to hospital malnutrition in Spain

Rationale: Disease-related malnutrition constitutes a highly prevalent healthcare problem with high costs associated. In Spain, the prevalence of malnutrition in hospitalized patients has been reported from 30% to 50%. Objectives: Main purposes of this consensus document were to establish recommendations that facilitate decision- making and action to prevent and early-diagnose disease-related hospital malnutrition, on the management of nutritional support methods and actions to evaluate nutritional treatment compliance and efficacy. Methods: A systematic bibliographical search of authors was performed, complemented by updated bibliography by author references up to 2010. From this review, some recommendations were defined, modified and critically evaluated by the representatives of scientific societies in a consensus conference (Dec 2010) following a structured brainstorming technique: the Metaplan® technique. A double validation process was undertaken until final recommendations were obtained. Results: 30 consensus recommendations for the prevention and management of hospital malnutrition are presented in this document. Recommendations cover all clinical care settings as well as prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of disease-related malnutrition. Conclusions: Nutritional screening is strongly recommended at all clinical settings when nutritional risk factors are identified or there is clinical suspicion of malnutrition. Nutritional assessment should be designed and performed according to centers’ resources, but clearly identified protocols should be available.

Measures to prevent surgical site infections: what surgeons (should) do.

BACKGROUND: The present study was designed to evaluate surgeons' strategies and adherence to preventive measures against surgical site infections (SSIs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All surgeons participating in a prospective Swiss multicentric surveillance program for SSIs received a questionnaire developed from the 2008 National (United Kingdom) Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) clinical guidelines on prevention and treatment of SSIs. We focused on perioperative management and surgical technique in hernia surgery, cholecystectomy, appendectomy, and colon surgery (COL). RESULTS: Forty-five of 50 surgeons contacted (90%) responded. Smoking cessation and nutritional screening are regularly propagated by 1/3 and 1/2 of surgeons, respectively. Thirty-eight percent practice bowel preparation before COL. Preoperative hair removal is routinely (90%) performed in the operating room with electric clippers. About 50% administer antibiotic prophylaxis within 30 min before incision. Intra-abdominal drains are common after COL (43%). Two thirds of respondents apply nonocclusive wound dressings that are manipulated after hand disinfection (87%). Dressings are usually changed on postoperative day (POD) 2 (75%), and wounds remain undressed on POD 2-3 or 4-5 (36% each). CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons' strategies to prevent SSIs still differ widely. The adherence to the current NICE guidelines is low for many procedures regardless of the available level of evidence. Further research should provide convincing data in order to justify standardization of perioperative management.

Medical nutrition in oncology : potential solution for managing malnutrition in cancer patients in Switzerland

The objective of this study is to: - Describe the cancer related complications, prevalence and economic burden of cancer; - Provide the review of the studies that have been done until now proving that specialized nutrition; can improve quality of life (QoL), shorten the length of hospital stay and reduce overall cost of patients care; - Describe different types of specialized nutritional support and tools/ guidelines used for nutritional screening; - Justify the use of specialized nutrition as an integral part of cancer treatment [Author, p. 6] [Contents] 3. General overview of cancer. 4. Specialized nutritional support and nutritional screening. 4.4 European guidelines for nutritional screening [Screening tools: Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST); Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS-2002); Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA)]. 5. Implementation of nutritional support in Swiss hospitals as an integral part of oncology treatment. 5.1 Nutritional guidelines used in Switzerland. 5.2 Status of prevention of malnutrition in cancer patients in Swiss hospitals. 5.3 Malnutrition in Swiss hospitals: medical costs and potential economies. 5.4 Recommendations for implementation of nutritional guidelines and nutritional support in Swiss hospitals.