Assessment tool to identify patients at risk of malnutrition

2011 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 15-15
CJEM ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (S1) ◽  
pp. S121-S122
Author(s):  
R. Tomlinson ◽  
T. Yokota ◽  
P. Jaggi ◽  
C. Kilburn ◽  
D. Bakken ◽  
...  

Introduction: Emergency Department (ED) fall risk screening has been newly implemented in Alberta based on Accreditation Canada requirements. Two existing inpatient tools failed to include certain ED risk conditions. One tool graded unconsciousness as no risk for falling, and neither considered intoxication or sedation. This led to the development of a new fall risk management screening tool, the FRM (Tool1). This study compared Tool1 with inpatient utilized Schmid Fall Risk Assessment Tool (Tool2) and the validated Hendrich II Fall Risk Model (Tool3). Methods: Patients (≥17 years old) in a tertiary care adult ED with any of the following; history of falling in the last 12 months, elderly/frail, incontinence, impaired gait, mobility assist device, confusion/disorientation, procedural sedation, intoxication/sedated, or unconscious were included. Forms were randomized to score patients using different paired screening tools: Tool1 paired with either Tool2 or Tool3. Percent agreement (PA) between the tools based on identification of a patient at either risk/no risk for falling; higher PA indicating more tool homogeneity. Results: A total of 928 screening forms were completed within our 8-week study period; 452 and 443 comparing Tool1 to Tool2 and Tool1 to Tool3, respectively. Thirty-two forms included only Tool1 scores, excluding them from comparative analysis. The average patient age (n=895) was 64.8±21.4 years. Tool1 identified 66.4% of patients at risk, whereas Tool2 and Tool3 identified only 19.2% and 31.4%, respectively. Tool1 and 2 had a PA of 50.2%, whereas Tool1 and Tool3 had a PA of 65.9%. Conclusion: The FRM tool had higher agreement with the validated assessment tool, identifying patients at risk for falling but better identified patients presenting with intoxication, need for procedural sedation and unconsciousness. The other tools generally miss these common ED conditions, putting these patients at risk. Validation and reliability assessments of the FRM tool are warranted.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Bernstein ◽  
Randall Moore ◽  
Lauren Rhee ◽  
Dina Aronson ◽  
David Katz

Malnutrition is common among hospitalized patients and associated with longer hospital stays, higher rates of rehospitalization, and increased mortality. Validated questionnaires of varying sensitivity and specificity to help identify patients at risk of malnutrition have been developed, but none has been broadly adopted. Tools to identify patients at risk for malnutrition should be quick, inexpensive, easy to administer and use, not require specialized nutrition knowledge, and provide results which can be entered into an electronic medical record; ideally, the tool should be deployed within 24 hours of admission and repeated if warranted. We hypothesize that a novel digital nutrition assessment tool which uses the Diet Quality Photo Navigation (DQPN) method, can help triage hospitalized patients toward further evaluation of nutritional status. We further propose that micronutrient deficiencies may be identified at the same time as malnutrition and that the reimbursement and cost savings from DQPN will prove substantially greater than the combined costs of its use and triggered dietitian consult. Deploying DQPN upon admission will represent an addition to standard hospital intake procedure that is frictionless for patients and health professionals, and one which may be overseen by clerical rather than clinical staff. The digital format of DQPN, which can be integrated into electronic medical records, will facilitate easier tracking and management of nutritional status over the course of hospitalization and post-discharge. To evaluate the hypotheses, DQPN will be deployed in a hospital setting to a group of patients who will also be seen by a registered dietitian to assess the nutritional status of each patient. Receiver operating characteristic curves will determine the point, or criterion, at which maximal true positivity rate and least false positivity rate for a diagnosis of malnutrition and specific nutrient deficiencies align. The study cohort will also be compared to a matched historical cohort to compare total medical spend and reimbursement between the intervention cohort and matched control. Testing of these hypotheses will thus allow for insight into whether DQPN may be used to identify malnutrition and nutrient deficiencies in hospitalized patients and, in so doing, improve patient outcomes, reduce healthcare utilization, and bring financial benefit to hospitals.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 215145932110021
Author(s):  
Taylor Johnson ◽  
Edward Fox ◽  
Sue Hassanbein

Introduction: Osteoporosis affects nearly half of the U.S. population. Screening methods are improving but remain inadequate, leaving the disease underdiagnosed and undertreated. The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness of an EMR implemented system that identifies patients at risk for osteoporosis via an OST (osteoporosis screening tool) score in prompting patients toward osteoporosis evaluation. Methods: OST scores are generated on every patient 50 years of age and older that is admitted to the Penn State Hershey Medical Center (PSHMC) and recorded in their electronic medical record. An OST score < 2 indicates that a patient has a potential risk for osteoporosis. Information Technology (IT) implemented the EMR OST calculation, which currently generates a daily filtered list of all patients with an OST score <2; patients with an OST score < 2 are then mailed letters approximately 3 months after their admission informing them of their risk for osteoporosis and suggesting that they schedule a follow-up appointment with a physician for further evaluation. To test the effectiveness of this system in prompting patients toward osteoporosis evaluation, approximately 3 months after letters were mailed, the patients were contacted via telephone and asked a series of questions to determine if the patients had sought osteoporosis evaluation. Results: In the intervention group, 67 (58.26%) of 115 did not schedule a follow-up, while the remaining 48 (41.74%) did seek a follow-up. Thus, the patient follow-up response rate improved with letter intervention using the OST score as an indicator (P < .0001) compared to historical controls (14.29%). Conclusion: Implementing an EMR OST score which identifies patients at risk for osteoporosis, which generates an automatic letter to the patient, significantly promotes patient driven osteoporosis evaluation compared to historical controls.


2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 1944-1955 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Schwarz ◽  
Elizabeth C. Ward ◽  
Petrea Cornwell ◽  
Anne Coccetti ◽  
Pamela D'Netto ◽  
...  

Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine (a) the agreement between allied health assistants (AHAs) and speech-language pathologists (SLPs) when completing dysphagia screening for low-risk referrals and at-risk patients under a delegation model and (b) the operational impact of this delegation model. Method All AHAs worked in the adult acute inpatient settings across three hospitals and completed training and competency evaluation prior to conducting independent screening. Screening (pass/fail) was based on results from pre-screening exclusionary questions in combination with a water swallow test and the Eating Assessment Tool. To examine the agreement of AHAs' decision making with SLPs, AHAs ( n = 7) and SLPs ( n = 8) conducted an independent, simultaneous dysphagia screening on 51 adult inpatients classified as low-risk/at-risk referrals. To examine operational impact, AHAs independently completed screening on 48 low-risk/at-risk patients, with subsequent clinical swallow evaluation conducted by an SLP with patients who failed screening. Results Exact agreement between AHAs and SLPs on overall pass/fail screening criteria for the first 51 patients was 100%. Exact agreement for the two tools was 100% for the Eating Assessment Tool and 96% for the water swallow test. In the operational impact phase ( n = 48), 58% of patients failed AHA screening, with only 10% false positives on subjective SLP assessment and nil identified false negatives. Conclusion AHAs demonstrated the ability to reliably conduct dysphagia screening on a cohort of low-risk patients, with a low rate of false negatives. Data support high level of agreement and positive operational impact of using trained AHAs to perform dysphagia screening in low-risk patients.


2005 ◽  
Vol 173 (4S) ◽  
pp. 455-455
Author(s):  
Anthony V. D’Amico ◽  
Ming-Hui Chen ◽  
Kimberly A. Roehl ◽  
William J. Catalona

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document