Diagnostic criteria for malnutrition - An ESPEN Consensus Statement
- PMID: 25799486
- DOI: 10.1016/j.clnu.2015.03.001
Diagnostic criteria for malnutrition - An ESPEN Consensus Statement
Abstract
Objective: To provide a consensus-based minimum set of criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition to be applied independent of clinical setting and aetiology, and to unify international terminology.
Method: The European Society of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) appointed a group of clinical scientists to perform a modified Delphi process, encompassing e-mail communications, face-to-face meetings, in group questionnaires and ballots, as well as a ballot for the ESPEN membership.
Result: First, ESPEN recommends that subjects at risk of malnutrition are identified by validated screening tools, and should be assessed and treated accordingly. Risk of malnutrition should have its own ICD Code. Second, a unanimous consensus was reached to advocate two options for the diagnosis of malnutrition. Option one requires body mass index (BMI, kg/m(2)) <18.5 to define malnutrition. Option two requires the combined finding of unintentional weight loss (mandatory) and at least one of either reduced BMI or a low fat free mass index (FFMI). Weight loss could be either >10% of habitual weight indefinite of time, or >5% over 3 months. Reduced BMI is <20 or <22 kg/m(2) in subjects younger and older than 70 years, respectively. Low FFMI is <15 and <17 kg/m(2) in females and males, respectively. About 12% of ESPEN members participated in a ballot; >75% agreed; i.e. indicated ≥7 on a 10-graded scale of acceptance, to this definition.
Conclusion: In individuals identified by screening as at risk of malnutrition, the diagnosis of malnutrition should be based on either a low BMI (<18.5 kg/m(2)), or on the combined finding of weight loss together with either reduced BMI (age-specific) or a low FFMI using sex-specific cut-offs.
Keywords: Body composition; Consensus; Definition; Delphi; Malnutrition; Nutritional assessment.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
Should significant weight loss mandated to be "unintentional" for resulting in and regarded as malnutrition?Clin Nutr. 2016 Feb;35(1):234. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2015.07.026. Epub 2015 Oct 13. Clin Nutr. 2016. PMID: 26481948 No abstract available.
-
Reply, Letter to the Editor - Should significant weight loss mandated to be "unintentional" for resulting in and regarded as malnutrition?Clin Nutr. 2016 Feb;35(1):235. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2015.07.024. Epub 2015 Oct 13. Clin Nutr. 2016. PMID: 26511153 No abstract available.
-
Reply, Letter to Editor - BMI, FFMI do not seem universally applicable in nutritional assessment & the place of SGA & functional evaluation shouldn't be overlooked.Clin Nutr. 2016 Feb;35(1):237. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2015.07.027. Epub 2015 Oct 13. Clin Nutr. 2016. PMID: 26511154 No abstract available.
-
BMI and FFMI do not seem universally applicable in nutritional assessment and the usefulness of SGA and functional evaluation should not be overlooked.Clin Nutr. 2016 Feb;35(1):236. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2015.07.025. Epub 2015 Oct 13. Clin Nutr. 2016. PMID: 26602243 No abstract available.
-
Reply to Dr. Lacrosse et al.Clin Nutr. 2017 Feb;36(1):309. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2016.09.017. Epub 2016 Sep 24. Clin Nutr. 2017. PMID: 27717512 No abstract available.
-
Letter to the Editor: Diagnostic criteria for malnutrition: Consequences for the nutrition teams.Clin Nutr. 2017 Feb;36(1):310. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2016.09.016. Epub 2016 Oct 27. Clin Nutr. 2017. PMID: 27919527 No abstract available.

