Comparison of three common nutritional screening tools with the new European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) criteria for malnutrition among patients with geriatric gastrointestinal cancer: a prospective study in China
- PMID: 29654013
- PMCID: PMC5898289
- DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019750
Comparison of three common nutritional screening tools with the new European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) criteria for malnutrition among patients with geriatric gastrointestinal cancer: a prospective study in China
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare three common nutritional screening tools with the new European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) diagnostic criteria for malnutrition among elderly patients with gastrointestinal cancer.
Research methodsandprocedures: Nutritional screening tools, including the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002), the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) and the Short Form of Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA-SF), were applied to 255 patients with gastrointestinal cancer. We compared the diagnostic values of these tools for malnutrition, using the new ESPEN diagnostic criteria for malnutrition as the 'gold standards'.
Results: According to the new ESPEN diagnostic criteria for malnutrition, 20% of the patients were diagnosed as malnourished. With the use of NRS 2002, 52.2% of the patients were found to be at high risk of malnutrition; with the use of MUST, 37.6% of the patients were found to be at moderate/high risk of malnutrition; and according to MNA-SF, 47.8% of the patients were found to be at nutritional risk. MUST was best correlated with the ESPEN diagnostic criteria (К=0.530, p<0.001) compared with NRS 2002 (К=0.312, p<0.001) and MNA-SF (К=0.380, p<0.001). The receiver operating characteristic curve of MUST had the highest area under the curve (AUC) compared with NRS 2002 and MNA-SF.
Conclusions: Among the tools, MUST was found to perform the best in identifyingmalnourished elderly patients with gastrointestinal cancer distinguished by the new ESPEN diagnostic criteria for malnutrition. Nevertheless, further studies are needed to verify our findings.
Trial registration number: ChiCTR-RRC-16009831; Pre-results.
Keywords: espen diagnostic criteria, elderly; gastrointestinal cancer; malnutrition; nutritional screening tools.
© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.
Conflict of interest statement
Competing interests: None declared.
Similar articles
-
Nutritional status and screening tools to detect nutritional risk in hospitalized patients with hepatic echinococcosis.Parasite. 2020;27:74. doi: 10.1051/parasite/2020071. Epub 2020 Dec 23. Parasite. 2020. PMID: 33357363 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of nutrition screening tools and calf circumference in estimating the preoperative prevalence of malnutrition among patients with aerodigestive tract cancers-a prospective observational cohort study.Support Care Cancer. 2022 Aug;30(8):6603-6612. doi: 10.1007/s00520-022-07092-5. Epub 2022 Apr 29. Support Care Cancer. 2022. PMID: 35486230
-
The two most popular malnutrition screening tools in the light of the new ESPEN consensus definition of the diagnostic criteria for malnutrition.Clin Nutr. 2017 Aug;36(4):1130-1135. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2016.07.014. Epub 2016 Aug 12. Clin Nutr. 2017. PMID: 27546796
-
[MALNUTRITION SCREENING TOOLS FOR ELDERLY IN GENERAL PRACTICE].Acta Med Croatica. 2015 Nov;69(4):339-45. Acta Med Croatica. 2015. PMID: 29083847 Review. Croatian.
-
Validity of Nutritional Screening Tools for Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2019 Oct;20(10):1351.e13-1351.e25. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2019.06.024. Epub 2019 Aug 10. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2019. PMID: 31409560
Cited by
-
Clinical and economic value of oral nutrition supplements in patients with cancer: a position paper from the Survivorship Care and Nutritional Support Working Group of Alliance Against Cancer.Support Care Cancer. 2022 Nov;30(11):9667-9679. doi: 10.1007/s00520-022-07269-y. Epub 2022 Jul 6. Support Care Cancer. 2022. PMID: 35792925 Review.
-
Nutritional status and screening tools to detect nutritional risk in hospitalized patients with hepatic echinococcosis.Parasite. 2020;27:74. doi: 10.1051/parasite/2020071. Epub 2020 Dec 23. Parasite. 2020. PMID: 33357363 Free PMC article.
-
Malnourished, gastrointestinal cancer patients undergoing surgery: burden of nutritional risk, use of oral nutritional supplements, and impact on health outcomes.Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2025 Jun;34(3):325-331. doi: 10.6133/apjcn.202506_34(3).0007. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2025. PMID: 40419393 Free PMC article.
-
Nutrition Risk Screening and Related Factors Analysis of Non-hospitalized Cancer Survivors: A Nationwide Online Survey in China.Front Nutr. 2022 Jun 21;9:920714. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2022.920714. eCollection 2022. Front Nutr. 2022. PMID: 35799588 Free PMC article.
-
Combination of Haemoglobin and Prognostic Nutritional Index Predicts the Prognosis of Postoperative Radiotherapy for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Cancer Manag Res. 2020 Sep 18;12:8589-8597. doi: 10.2147/CMAR.S266821. eCollection 2020. Cancer Manag Res. 2020. PMID: 32982451 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Balducci L, Extermann M. Cancer and aging. An evolving panorama. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 2000;14:1–16. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical