scholarly journals Evaluation of the effectiveness of the Nutritional Risk Screening System 2002 (NRS‐2002) in COVID‐19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Babak Alikiaii ◽  
Zahra Heidari ◽  
Afshar Fazeli ◽  
Mojtaba Rahimi Varposhti ◽  
Darioush Moradi Farsani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Nutritional Risk ◽  
Screening System ◽  
Risk Screening ◽  
Nrs 2002 ◽  
Nutritional Risk Screening

Clinical and Seasonal Variations of Nutritional Risk Screening in Patients Scheduled for Rehabilitation after Heart Surgery

2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 336
Author(s):  
Marko Boban ◽  
Viktor Persic ◽  
Zeljko Jovanovic ◽  
Niksa Drinkovic ◽  
Milan Milosevic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weight Loss ◽  
Heart Surgery ◽  
Nutritional Risk ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Risk Screening ◽  
Climate Effects ◽  
Seasonal Climate ◽  
Nrs 2002 ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Nutritional Risk Screening

<p><b>Background:</b> Current knowledge on the pervasiveness of increased nutritional risk in cardiovascular diseases is limited. Our aim was to analyze the characteristics of nutritional risk screening in patients scheduled for rehabilitation after heart surgery. Prevalence and extent of nutritional risk were studied in connection with patients' characteristics and seasonal climate effects on weight loss dynamics.</p><p><b>Methods:</b> The cohort included 65 consecutive patients with an age range of 25-84 years, 2-6 months after surgical treatment for ischemic or valvular heart disease. Nutritional risk screening was appraised using a standardized NRS-2002 questionnaire. Groups were analyzed according to a timeline of rehabilitation according to the "cold" and "warm" seasons of the moderate Mediterranean climate in Opatija, Croatia.</p><p><b>Results:</b> Increased nutritional risk scores (NRS-2002) of >3 were found in 96% of studied patients. Mean NRS-2002 of patients was 5.0 � 1.0, with a percentage weight loss history of 11.7% � 2.2% (4.6-19.0). Risk was found to be more pronounced during the warmer season, with NRS-2002 scores of 5.3 � 0.7 versus 4.8 � 1.1 (<i>P</i> = 0.136) and greater loss of weight of 13.0% � 3.2% versus 10.6% � 3% (<i>P</i> = 0.005), respectively. Increased nutritional risk correlated significantly with creatinine concentrations (rho = 0.359; <i>P</i> = 0.034 versus 0.584; <i>P</i> = 0.001, respectively). Significant discordance in correlations was found between NRS-2002 and the decrease in left ventricle systolic function (rho correlation coefficient [rho-cc] = -0.428; <i>P</i> = 0.009), the increase in glucose concentrations (cc = 0.600; <i>P</i> < 0.001), and the decrease in erythrocyte counts (cc = -0.520; <i>P</i> = 0.001) during the colder season.</p><p><b>Conclusion:</b> Increased nutritional risk was found to be frequently expressed in the course of rehabilitation after heart surgery. Although seasonal climate effects influenced the weight loss dynamics, the impact on reproducibility of NRS-2002 was clinically less important. Further studies on the connection of nutritional risk with composited end points might offer improvements in overall quality of treatment.</p>

scholarly journals Comparação dos critérios da nrs-2002 com o risco nutricional em pacientes hospitalizados

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (9) ◽  
pp. 3325-3334
Author(s):  
Adriana Aparecida de Oliveira Barbosa ◽  
Andréa Pereira Vicentini ◽  
Fernanda Ramos Langa
Keyword(s):  
Nutritional Risk ◽  
Risk Screening ◽  
Nrs 2002 ◽  
Para Determinar ◽  
Nutritional Risk Screening

Resumo A triagem “Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS-2002)” é uma ferramenta considerada padrão ouro na análise do risco nutricional. Sendo assim, objetivou-se identificar na “NRS-2002” qual ou quais os critérios avaliados que mais contribuem para determinar o risco nutricional. Estudo descritivo transversal e quantitativo com 763 adultos e idosos hospitalizados, no ano de 2015. Aplicada a “NRS-2002” que avalia as variáveis Índice de Massa Corporal (IMC), perda de peso nos últimos 3 meses, redução da ingestão alimentar na última semana e gravidade da doença. A estatística dos dados foi descritiva e analítica por meio do método de regressão logística univariada. Observou-se que 46,4% dos pacientes apresentaram risco nutricional, com maiores chances em homens e idosos. Sendo a perda de peso o critério mais prevalente seguido da redução da ingestão alimentar, o IMC < 20,5kg/m² teve maior efeito no risco nutricional (OR = 31,0; IC 95%:14,21;67,44). Concluiu-se que o IMC < 20,5kg/m² e a perda de peso nos últimos três meses foram os fatores que mais contribuíram na determinação do risco nutricional, sendo a identificação precoce do risco nutricional de extrema importância para o direcionamento da conduta dietoterápica para a melhora da ingestão alimentar com objetivo de recuperação do peso corporal.

scholarly journals Nutritional Risk Screening Tools for Elderly Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Franciole de Oliveira Silva ◽  
Severina Carla Vieira Cunha Lima ◽  
Karine Cavalcanti Mauricio Sena-Evangelista ◽  
Dirce Marchioni ◽  
Ricardo Ney Cobucci ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Nutritional Risk ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Nutritional Screening ◽  
Risk Screening ◽  
Nrs 2002 ◽  
Nutritional Risk Screening

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with high risk of malnutrition, primarily in elderly people; assessing nutritional risk using appropriate screening tools is critical. This systematic review identified applicable tools and assessed their measurement properties. Literature was searched in the MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS databases. Four studies conducted in China met the eligibility criteria. Sample sizes ranged from six to 182, and participants&rsquo; ages from 65 to 87 years. Seven nutritional screening and assessment tools were used: the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002), Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), MNA-short form (MNA-sf), Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), Nutritional Risk Index (NRI), Geriatric NRI (GNRI), and modified Nutrition Risk in the Critically ill (mNUTRIC) score. Nutritional risk was identified in 27.5% to 100% of participants. The NRS-2002, MNA, MNA-sf, NRI, and MUST demonstrated high sensitivity; the MUST had better specificity. The MNA and MUST demonstrated better criterion validity. The MNA-sf demonstrated better predictive validity for poor appetite and weight loss; the NRS-2002 demonstrated better predictive validity for prolonged hospitalization. mNUTRIC score demonstrated good predictive validity for hospital mortality. Most instruments demonstrate high sensitivity for identifying nutritional risk, but none are acknowledged as the best for nutritional screening in elderly COVID-19 patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document