Dienst van SURF
© 2025 SURF
Objectives: Malnutrition is associated with a twofold higher risk of dying in patients with tuberculosis (TB) and considered an important potentially reversible risk factor for failure of TB treatment. The construct of malnutrition has three domains: intake or uptake of nutrition; body composition and physical and cognitive function. The objectives of this systematic review are to identify malnutrition assessment methods, and to quantify how malnutrition assessment methods capture the international consensus definition for malnutrition, in patients with TB.Design: Different assessment methods were identified. We determined the extent of capturing of the three domains of malnutrition, that is, intake or uptake of nutrition, body composition and physical and cognitive function.Results: Seventeen malnutrition assessment methods were identified in 69 included studies. In 53/69 (77%) of studies, body mass index was used as the only malnutrition assessment method. Three out of 69 studies (4%) used a method that captured all three domains of malnutrition.Conclusions: Our study focused on published articles. Implementation of new criteria takes time, which may take longer than the period covered by this review. Most patients with TB are assessed for only one aspect of the conceptual definition of malnutrition. The use of international consensus criteria is recommended to establish uniform diagnostics and treatment of malnutrition.
LINK
Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine how diagnosing and coding of malnutrition in an internal medicine ward setting influences potential hospital reimbursement. Methods: Patients admitted to the internal medicine ward of Centro Hospitalar do Médio Ave between April 24 and May 22, 2018 were screened by Nutritional Risk Screening 2002, and patients classified as at “risk for malnutrition” were assessed by the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA). For each patient, medical coders simulated coding, taking into account the malnutrition diagnosis by PG-SGA, and compared it with the real coding as retrieved from the medical records. For the coding, the Diagnosis-Related Group and Severity of Illness were determined, allowing the calculation of hospitalization cost (HC) according to Portuguese Ministerial Directive number 207/2017. The increase of HC in this subsample was extrapolated to the number of patients admitted during 2018, to obtain the estimated unreported annual HC. Results: Of the 71% (92/129) participants having malnutrition risk according to Nutritional Risk Screening 2002, 86% were malnourished. Including malnutrition diagnosis in the coding of malnourished patients increased the level of Severity of Illness in 39% of cases and increased HC for this subsample, resulting in €52 000. Extrapolating for the annual HC, total HC reached €1.3 million. Conclusions: Identifying malnourished patients and including this highly prevalent diagnosis in medical records allows malnutrition coding and consequent increase of HC. This can improve the potential hospital reimbursement, which could contribute to the quality of patient care and economic sustainability of hospitals.
Rationale: Inadequate operationalisation of the multidimensial concept of malnutrition may result in inadequate evaluation of nutritional status. In this review we aimed to assess content validity of methods used to assess malnutrition in cancer patients, according to domains directly derived from European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) and American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) definitions for malnutrition. Methods: Studies on malnutrition in adult cancer patients published between 1999 and 2013 were considered eligible. Methods to assess malnutrition were classified using 13 indicators within three domains that the malnutrition definitions of ESPEN and ASPEN have in common: A) Nutrient balance; B) Changes in body shape, body area and body composition; and C) Body function.Content validity index per method (M-CVIA-C) was calculated by averaging indicator scores weighted per domain, quantifying to what extent the methods covered the construct of malnutrition. Acceptable content validity was defined as M-CVIA-C ≥0.80.Results: 40 Different methods within 166 articles were identified. Median M-CVIA-C was 0.22 (interquartile range: 0.08-0.53). None of the methods reached M-CVIA-C=0.80. Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA; M-CVIA-C=0.75), Nutritional Screening Questionnaire (NSQ; M-CVIA-C=0.56) and Scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA; M-CVIA-C=0.53) were responsible for the top 25% of M-CVIA-C scores. Conclusion: Content validity of methods that assess malnutrition in cancer patients varies widely and is unacceptable in terms of M-CVIA-C. MNA, NSQ and PG-SGA showed highest scores in terms of content validity. Conflict of interest: None.