Incidence Of Nutritional Risk Research Articles

A cross-sectional survey study on the correlation analysis of nutritional status and intestinal flora in patients with esophageal cancer.

This study aims to examine the nutritional status of individuals diagnosed with esophageal cancer and compare the nutritional indicators and intestinal flora between malnourished and non-malnourished patients. The findings aim to contribute to the early prevention of malnutrition and the development of interventions targeting the intestinal flora to treat esophageal cancer. An 80-patient sample of hospitalized individuals with esophageal cancer was selected from the radiotherapy department of our hospital between July 2021 and July 2022 to evaluate NRS2002 scores and PG-SGA scores. This cross-sectional analysis aimed to examine the disparities in dietary nutrient intake, blood indicators, body composition, and fecal intestinal flora between malnourished and non-malnourished patients with esophageal cancer. Additionally, we randomly selected 40 cases to predict and analyze the relationship between intestinal flora and malnutrition. The incidence of nutritional risk and malnutrition in patients with esophageal cancer was 62.5% and 60%, respectively. The low intake of carbohydrates and dietary fiber in the malnutrition group was statistically significant compared to those in the non-malnutrition group (P < 0.05). The albumin (ALB) level was lower in the malnutrition group than in the non-malnutrition group, while the C-reactive protein (CRP) level was higher; these differences were also statistically significant (P < 0.05). The basal metabolic rate, phase angle, body cell mass, muscle mass, skeletal muscle index, and fat-free mass index in the malnutrition group all decreased compared to the non-malnutrition group. The extracellular water/total body water was higher than that in the non-malnutrition group, which was also statistically significant (P < 0.05). As shown by 16S rDNA sequencing of fecal intestinal flora, there was no significant difference in α and β diversity between the malnutrition and non-malnutrition groups; at the genus level, significant differences were observed for Selimonas, Clostridioides, Dielma, Lactobacillus, and [Eubacterium]_siraeum_group. However, Dielma, Sellimonas, and Clostridioides were significantly lower in the malnutrition group than in the non-malnutrition group, while Anaerococcus, Atopobium, Eubacterium_siraeum_group, and Lactobacillus were significantly higher in the malnutrition group. Correlation analysis between different genera and clinical indicators showed that Lactobacillus was positively correlated with ALB, dietary energy, intracellular water/total body water (ICW/TBW), phase angle (PA), muscle mass (MM), skeletal muscle mass (SMM), body cell mass (BCM), basal metabolic rate (BMR), appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASMM), total body water (TBW), fat-free mass index (FFMI), skeletal muscle index (SMI), fat-free mass (FFM), Weight, body mass index (BMI) (r > 0, P < 0.05), but negatively correlated with PG-SGA score, NRS2002 score, and extracellular water/total body water (ECW/TBW) (r < 0, P < 0.05). Based on PG-SGA, there was only a low accuracy for identifying nutrient deficiency (most areas under curve (AUC) values fell within 0.5 to 0.7, or even lower), with Lachnoclostridium's AUC being 0.688 (CI = 0.518-0.858) and Lactobacillus_salivarius_g_Lactobacillus's AUC being 0.257 (CI = 0.098-0.416). A KEGG functional analysis based on 16S data indicated potential differences affecting glucose metabolism pathways and the synthesis or division of DNA, influencing the onset, development, and prognosis of esophageal cancer patients. Esophageal cancer patients are more likely to be malnourished. The nutritional status of these patients is closely linked to the intake of carbohydrates and fiber, albumin levels, inflammation levels, and lean body mass. Furthermore, the patient's intestinal flora composition plays a significant role in their nutritional well-being. Consequently, modulating the intestinal flora holds promise as a potential therapeutic approach for addressing malnutrition in esophageal cancer patients. ChiCTR2100048141.

Perioperative nutritional risk and its influencing factors in patients with oral cancer: a longitudinal study.

We aimed to investigate the nutritional risk status and dynamic changes in patients with perioperative oral cancer at different stages and analyze the factors influencing nutritional risk and the correlation among body mass index, nutrition-related symptoms, and nutritional risk. In total, 198 patients with oral cancer who were hospitalized in the Head & Neck Surgery Departments of a tertiary cancer hospital in Hunan Province, China, from May 2020 to January 2021, were selected as participants. The Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 scale and Head and Neck Patient Symptom Checklist were used to assess patients on admission day, 7 days post-surgery, and 1 month post-discharge. Multivariate analysis of variance, paired t-test, and generalized estimating equation were used to analyze the trajectory and influencing factors of nutritional risk in patients with perioperative oral cancer. Spearman's correlation analysis was used to explore the correlation among body mass index, symptoms, and nutritional risk. The nutritional risk scores of patients with oral cancer at the three time points were 2.30 ± 0.84, 3.21 ± 0.94, and 2.11 ± 0.84, respectively, and the differences were significant (p < 0.05). The incidences of nutritional risk were 30.3, 52.5, and 37.9%, respectively. The factors influencing nutritional risk included education level, smoking status, clinical stage, flap repair, and tracheotomy (β = -0.326, 0.386, 0.387, 0.336, and 0.240, respectively, p < 0.05). Nutritional risk was negatively correlated with body mass index (rs = -0.455, p < 0.01) and positively correlated with pain, loss of appetite, sore mouth, bothersome smells, swallowing difficulty, taste changes, depression, chewing difficulty, thick saliva, and anxiety (rs = 0.252, 0.179, 0.269, 0.155, 0.252, 0.212, 0.244, 0.384, 0.260, and 0.157, respectively, p < 0.05). The incidence of nutritional risk in patients with perioperative oral cancer was high, and the trajectory of nutritional risk changed over time. Strengthening the nutritional monitoring and management of postoperative patients or those with low education level, advanced-stage cancer, flap repair, tracheotomy, and low body mass index; strengthening tobacco control management; and controlling nutrition-related discomfort symptoms in perioperative oral cancer patients are necessary.

Comparison of GLIM, SGA, PG-SGA, and PNI in diagnosing malnutrition among hepatobiliary-pancreatic surgery patients.

To compare the diagnostic value of four tools-the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria, the subjective global assessment (SGA), patient-generated subjective global assessment (PG-SGA), and prognostic nutritional index (PNI) in malnutrition among hospitalized patients undergoing hepatobiliary-pancreatic surgery. Meanwhile, to observe the nutritional intervention of these patients. Present study was a cross-sectional study, including 506 hospitalized patients who underwent hepatobiliary-pancreatic surgery between December 2020 and February 2022 at Ningbo Medical Center Lihuili Hospital, China. The incidence rate of malnutrition was diagnosed using the four tools. The consistency of the four tools was analyzed by Cohen's kappa statistic. Data, including nutritional characteristics and nutritional interventions, were collected. The nutritional intervention was observed according to the principles of Five Steps Nutritional Treatment. The prevalence was 36.75, 44.58, and 60.24%, as diagnosed by the GLIM, PG-SGA, and PNI, respectively, among 332 tumor patients. Among the 174 non-tumor patients, the prevalence was 9.77, 10.92, and 32.18% as diagnosed by the GLIM, SGA, and PNI. The diagnostic concordance of PG-SGA and GLIM was higher (Kappa = 0.814, <0.001) than SGA vs. GLIM (Kappa = 0.752, P < 0.001) and PNI vs. GLIM (Kappa = 0.265, P < 0.001). The univariate analysis revealed that older age, lower BMI and tumorous were significantly associated with nutritional risks and malnutrition. Among 170 patients with nutritional risk, most of patients (118/170, 69.41%) did not meet the nutritional support standard. The incidence of nutritional risk and malnutrition is high among patients with hepatobiliary and pancreatic diseases, specifically those with tumors. The GLIM showed the lowest prevalence of malnutrition among the four tools. The PG-SGA and GLIM had a relative high level of agreement. There was a low proportion of nutritional support in patients. More prospective and well-designed cohort studies are needed to confirm the relevance of these criteria in clinical practice in the future.

PERFIL NUTRICIONAL DE IDOSOS HOSPITALIZADOS

This study aimed to know the nutritional profile of elderly patients hospitalized in a public hospital. A retrospective survey of 250 nutritional assessment sheets of elderly people admitted to the hospital service was carried out, where anthropometric data, nutritional diagnosis and laboratory tests were collected. Prevalence of low weight and lean mass depletion was detected among the oldest old, as well as a significant correlation between the levels of albumin and creatine with the muscular depletion measured by the calf circumference (CP). Regarding food intake, it was observed that 14% ingested a lower amount than prescribed, and the long-lived elderly people needed more food intervention. It is concluded that the incidence of nutritional risk and malnutrition among hospitalized elderly people is higher among long-lived elderly people, and that in this group there is a negative correlation between serum albumin levels with body mass index and CP.

Risk factors for inpatient malnutrition and length of stay assessed by 'NutritionDay' in China.

NutritionDay is a yearly global point-prevalence study of malnutrition or nutritional risk in hospitals. We aimed to provide a comprehensive nutritional survey of hospitalized patients and analyze the risk factors of malnutrition and prolonged hospitalization in Chinese inpatients. The international daylong cross-sectional survey was performed on November 07th, 2019. Ten hospitals were invited to participate in this NutritionDay survey. Nutritional risk was identified by nutritional risk screening 2002, and malnutrition was identified by the ESPEN criteria. We measured the incidence of malnutrition and nutritional risk. And we analysed risk factors for malnutrition and length of stay in Chinese hospitalized patients. 875 hospitalized patients from 6 departments were included in the analysis. The malnutrition rate was 11.6% and the incidence of nutritional risk was 17.8%. It was analyzed that tumor load, end-stage disease, motility, self-rated health, types of oral medicine, and food intake during the past week were independent risk factors for malnutrition or nutritional risk. 56.2% (118/210) of patients at nutritional risk or malnutrition received extra nutritional support, whereas 22.5% (88/391) well-nourished patients did. Moreover, nutrition status, ever stayed in ICU and self-rated health were associated with prolonged length of stay. In a word, the prevalence of malnutrition or nutritional risk was about 29.4%. Patients with malnutrition or nutritional risk had a higher transfer rate, lower rehabilitation rate and longer hospital stays. The attention to malnutrition patients needs to be further strengthened.

Malnutrition dynamics according to GLIM criteria in hospitalized elderly.

Assess the different nutritional status between admission and discharged in older adult patients using the GLIM criteria. A retrospective analysis was conducted on a multicenter study which initiated in 34 hospitals in China with 2734 hospitalized older patients. The dynamic changes of malnutrition according to GLIM criteria were performed between at admission and discharge, and their significance was analyzed using the chi-square test. The association between malnutrition and clinical outcomes was analyzed using the chi-square test, t-test, or rank sum test, and divided into different disease types for further analysis. The incidence of nutritional risk in elderly patients was 51.6% at admission and 48.4% at discharge. The prevalence of malnutrition according to the GLIM criteria was 19.6% at admission and increased to 33.4% at discharge, which was significantly different. Different age and disease type were related with nutrition status. Malnutrition is significantly association with adverse clinical outcomes such as increased risk of complications and prolonged length of hospital stay. The GLIM criteria can be used in elderly patients to assess malnutrition. The prevalence of malnutrition in elderly inpatients is high, and the prevalence of malnutrition at discharge is higher than that observed at admission. Attention should be paid to the dynamic changes of malnutrition in elderly patients during hospitalization.

Nutritional Risk and Assessment for Patients with Cancer Pain

Background The incidence of nutritional risk and malnutrition are high in patients with cancer pain. It is very important to choose an effective tool to identify these patients promptly. However, few studies have discussed this issue. The primary objective of this study is to clarify the similarities and differences between the two nutritional screening and assessment tools, and to estimate the anthropometry and biochemical indicators of the patients with cancer pain, with a view to provide help for treatment of these patients. Method Data of 146 patients with cancer pain were collected from August 2018 to May 2019 in the Pain Therapy Department of Tianjin Cancer Hospital. The information of numerical rating scale (NRS), nutritional risk screening-2002 (NRS-2002), patient-generated subjective global assessment (PG-SGA), anthropometry and biochemical indicators were collected for pain assessment, nutritional risk screening, and nutritional status assessment. Results NRS scores had a positive correlation with NRS-2002 (R = 0.273, P = 0.001) and PG-SGA (R = 0.341, P = 0.000) separately. NRS-2002 and PG-SGA had a significant positive correlation with each other (R = 0.468, P = 0.000). NRS-2002 was finished in a shorter time period (4.2 ± 0.8 min vs. 12.8 ± 0.8 min, P = 0.001), while PG-SGA had a higher detection rate of malnutrition (86.3% vs. 65.8%). In the stepwise multiple regression analysis, NRS (0.258, P = 0.001), PA (−0.297, P = 0.000), TP (0.178, P = 0.030) are the indicators of NRS-2002; and NRS (0.317, P = 0.000), PA (β = 0.288, P = 0.000) and BMI (−0.281, P = 0.000) are the related variables of PG-SGA. The kappa coefficient was lower than 0.4 (kappa value = 0.396) when choosing the score of NRS-2002 ≥ 3 and PG-SGA ≥ 9 as the diagnostic criteria. If choosing the score of NRS-2002 ≥ 2 and PG-SGA ≥ 9, both the correlation coefficient (R = 0.699, P = 0.000) and the kappa coefficient (kappa value = 0.698, P = 0.000) became more coefficient. Conclusions Both NRS-2002 and PG-SGA could identify patients with nutritional risk and malnutrition accurately. NRS-2002 is simpler and takes less time to finish, while PG-SGA is more cumbersome with a higher detection rate of malnutrition. NRS, PA, TP and BMI are the most important reference indicators predicting on nutritional risk index and malnutrition status. We recommend NRS-2002 ≥ 2 as the diagnostic criteria in order to avoid missing the patients with nutritional risk.

A Cross-Sectional Study on Appetite, Nutritional Status and Nutritional Support of Hospitalized Patients

Objective: To understand the appetite and nutritional status of hospitalized patients in a tertiary A general hospital in Guangzhou, Guangdong Province. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of appetite and nutritional status assessment on inpatients in 44 wards of the hospital was conducted. Taking all “conscious patients hospitalized for more than 48 hours” in the hospital on November 25, 2020 as the survey subjects, the patients’ appetite, dietary intake, nutrition and nutritional support in the past week were investigated. Results: A total of 890 cases were investigated, among which 25 cases (2.81%) with missing data were excluded, and thus 865 investigated cases were considered effective. The incidence of nutritional risk was 28.67%, malnutrition 13.29%, external tube feeding nutrition 3.24%, parenteral nutrition 7.05%, and oral nutritional supplement 10.40%. The average score of appetite assessment was (6.99 ± 2.43) points. Among them, cases with appetite assessment scores r = 0.548) and daily intake compliance rate (r = 0.263) (p p β = −0.079, p = 0.023). The difference between the appetite assessment scores and the daily intake compliance rates of patients with different nutritional support methods was statistically significant (p < 0.05); the individualized diet group had the highest appetite assessment score (8.57 ± 1.70), while the parenteral nutrition group had the lowest appetite assessment score (4.90 ± 2.99); the individualized diet group had the highest daily intake rate of 100%, followed by the parenteral nutrition group with 96.72%, and the regular diet group had the lowest rate of 84.02%. Conclusion: The appetite of hospitalized patients is closely related to nutritional status, and therefore, attention should be paid to the appetite status and nutritional status of hospitalized patients. Inpatients with different nutritional support methods should be given individualized appetite and nutritional interventions.

Application of STRONGkids to screen infants with lower respiratory tract infection and its possible influence on clinical outcome

Objective To investigate the incidence of nutritional risk in infants with lower respiratory tract infection, and to compare the effects of different nutritional risks on clinical outcomes, and to provide evidence for clinical nutritional management of infantile lower respiratory tract infection. Methods Infants and young children with lower respiratory tract infection who were hospitalized in our hospital from January 2013 to March 2016 were selected as subjects. Nutritional risk screening was performed using the Nutritional Status and Growth Risk Screening Tool (STRONGkids). Results A total of 957 infants with lower respiratory tract infections were included in the study. The incidence of high nutrition risk and low and medium nutritional risk were 17.6% and 82.4%, respectively. The clinical cure rate was 68.5% and 71.4% respectively. The children with pneumonia and bronchitis had high nutritional risk. The incidence rates were 20.60% and 4.87%, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (χ2=25.52, P=0.000). Time-effect single factor analysis (Kaplan-Meier method): The hospitalization time for infants with low nutritional risk and high nutritional risk was 9.3(0.3) d and 13.3(1.0) d, respectively. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant. (χ2=28.33, P=0.000), the total hospitalization expenses were 5 653.5(224.8) yuan and 10 079.5(1 755.8) yuan respectively. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (χ2=4.47, P=0.034). Multivariate COX regression analysis: High nutritional risk was a risk factor for hospitalization of hospitalized infants with lower respiratory tract infection (RR=1.57, P=0.024). Conclusion There is a high incidence of high nutritional risk in infants with lower respiratory tract infection. Compared with children with low and moderate nutritional risk, the hospitalization time is longer, the hospitalization cost is increased, and the clinical cure rate is lower, which is the risk of clinical outcome. factor. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct nutrition risk screening for infants with lower respiratory tract infections, and provide a theoretical basis for clinical nutrition evaluation and nutritional intervention. Key words: Respiratory infections; Infants; Nutritional status and growth risk screening tools

Effect of clinical pharmacists participating in parenteral nutrition support intervention in patients hospitalized in hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery

Objective To evaluate the effect of clinical pharmacists on parenteral nutrition support interventions, and to provide reference for clinical pharmacists to participate in the ERAS Nutrition Support Group work model. Methods A total of 490 patients hospitalized in department of hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery from November 2016 to January 2017 were selected as control group. 521 patients hospitalized in department of hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery from November 2018 to January 2019 were selected as intervention group. Nutritional risk, parenteral nutrition support indications, parenteral nutrition prescription energy and amino acid supply, prescription incompatibility and rationality, prescription osmotic concentration and phlebitis, parenteral nutrition and drugs in Y-tube compatibility of the above patients were analyzed to evaluate the effect of interventions by clinical pharmacists after participating in the nutritional support team. Results Patients with benign pancreatic diseases in the two groups had higher incidence of nutritional risk (78.2%, 75.6%), and patients with benign biliary diseases had lower incidence of nutritional risk (76.4%, 69.9%). Incidence of patients having parenteral nutrition support indications, namely NRS 2002≥3 points was higher in intervention group (83.6%) than in control group (56.6%); parenteral nutrition prescription energy and amino acid supply were higher in intervention group than in control group, patients in the intervention group had lower blood albumin dosage and no over-indication medication than patients in the control group; patients in both groups had no parenteral nutrition prescription safety issues such as glycolipid ratio (kJ∶kJ) 0.05). The compatibility of parenteral nutrition solution and drug in Y-tube was lower in the intervention group than in the control group. Conclusion The participation of clinical pharmacist in the ERAS nutrition treatment team, who will assist the doctor in formulating the nutritional treatment plan, monitor the patient's nutritional support and conduct regular indoor training, can effectively improve the reasonable application of parenteral nutrition support, standardize the use of therapeutic drugs, and guide patients and caregivers to use the preparations safely so that to ensure patients' safety in clinical interventions. Key words: Department of hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery; Clinical pharmacist; Nutritional Risk; Parenteral nutrition support; Total nutrition admixture

Nutrition in Cancer Patients.

Background: Despite being recognised that nutritional intervention is essential, nutritional support is not widely accessible to all patients. Given the incidence of nutritional risk and nutrition wasting, and because cachexia management remains a challenge in clinical practice, a multidisciplinary approach with targeted nutrition is vital to improve the quality of care in oncology. Methods: A literature search in PubMed and Cochrane Library was performed from inception until 26 March. The search consisted of terms on: cancer, nutrition, nutritional therapy, malnutrition, cachexia, sarcopenia, survival, nutrients and guidelines. Key words were linked using “OR” as a Boolean function and the results of the four components were combined by utilizing the “AND” Boolean function. Guidelines, clinical trials and observational studies written in English, were selected. Seminal papers were referenced in this article as appropriate. Relevant articles are discussed in this article. Results: Recent literature supports integration of nutrition screening/assessment in cancer care. Body composition assessment is suggested to be determinant for interventions, treatments and outcomes. Nutritional intervention is mandatory as adjuvant to any treatment, as it improves nutrition parameters, body composition, symptoms, quality of life and ultimately survival. Nutrition counselling is the first choice, with/without oral nutritional supplements (ONS). Criteria for escalating nutrition measures include: (1) 50% of intake vs. requirements for more than 1–2 weeks; (2) if it is anticipated that undernourished patients will not eat and/or absorb nutrients for a long period; (3) if the tumour itself impairs oral intake. N-3 fatty acids are promising nutrients, yet clinically they lack trials with homogeneous populations to clarify the identified clinical benefits. Insufficient protein intake is a key feature in cancer; recent guidelines suggest a higher range of protein because of the likely beneficial effects for treatment tolerance and efficacy. Amino acids for counteracting muscle wasting need further research. Vitamins/minerals are recommended in doses close to the recommended dietary allowances and avoid higher doses. Vitamin D deficiency might be relevant in cancer and has been suggested to be needed to optimise protein supplements effectiveness. Conclusions: A proactive assessment of the clinical alterations that occur in cancer is essential for selecting the adequate nutritional intervention with the best possible impact on nutritional status, body composition, treatment efficacy and ultimately reducing complications and improving survival and quality of life.

Relationship between Postoperative Recovery and Nutrition Risk Screened by NRS 2002 and Nutrition Support Status in Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer

Objective: Investigating incidence of nutritional risk and nutrition support in gastrointestinal cancer patients to provide reference for improving the clinical nutritional application level.Method: We evaluated the nutritional risk of gastrointestinal cancer patients who were newly admitted from September 2015 to February 2016 by Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002).Results: Totally, 201 cases completed assessment by NRS 2002, and 69 cases (34.3%) were at nutritional risk. The incidence of nutritional risk was higher in patients with ≥65 (P < 0.05), with tumor size ≥ 5 cm (P < 0.05) or well-differentiated (P < 0.001). Incidence of nutritional risk in patients with BMI < 18.5 was higher than patients with BMI 18.5–25 and ≥25 (P < 0.05). Patients with nutrition risk had greater rate of anemia than with no risk. In nutritional risk group, 54 cases underwent enteral nutrition support, and their hospitalization stay was shorter, and the rates of complications were smaller (P < 0.05). Further multivariate logistic regression analysis showed NRS 2002 score, middle differentiation degree and III/I were the risk factors for postoperative complication.Conclusion: Preoperative NRS 2002 score was proved to be a predictive index for postoperative complication rate, and this indicates that patients with a high preoperative NRS 2002 score are at higher risk of developing postoperative complications and longer recovery period.

Pretreatment nutritional risk as a prognostic factor in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy.

Head and neck cancer patients often experience nutritional deterioration, which decreases their treatment tolerance and is associated with poor outcomes. We analyzed nutritional status in head and neck cancer patients before and during treatment, and its impact on clinical outcomes. Between January 2009 and April 2012, 336 head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy were prospectively entered into the study. The Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002) assessment was used to evaluate their nutritional status. A total of 227 patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma and 109 patients with head and neck cancers were analyzed. The proportion of patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy at nutritional risk was 61.3%, with 11.9% at risk before treatment and 49.4% developing risk during treatment. In multivariate analysis, nutritional risk before treatment was associated with T stage for the two groups. Risk was significantly higher in patients receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy during treatment for nasopharygeal carcinoma patients. The prognosis of pretreatment nutritional risk patients was worse than those becoming at risk during treatment and those without nutritional risk (3-year overall survival 62.9% vs 81.7% vs 80.6%, p=0.026; 3-year disease-free survival 64.8% vs 84.5% vs 84.4%, p=0.019). The incidence of nutritional risk is high in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, especially during treatment. Pretreatment nutritional risk evaluated using the NRS 2002 can predict patient prognosis.

Dynamic investigation of nutritional risk in patients with malignant tumor during hospitalization

Objective: To prospectively investigate the changes in nutritional status of patients with malignant tumors during hospitalization by using nutritional risk screening (NRS2002), and to analyze the correlation between the nutritional status and clinical outcomes . Methods: This was a prospective and parallel research done by multi-center collaboration from 34 hospitals in China from June to September 2014.Hospitalized patients with malignant tumors inthese departments (Department of Gastroenterology, respiratory medicine, oncology, general surgery, thoracic surgery and geriatrics)were investigated. Only the patients with age≥ 18 years and hospitalization time between 7-30 days were included. During hospitalization, the physical indexes of human bodywere measured, and the NRS 2002 scores, and monitored the nutritional support at the time points of admission and 24 hours before discharge were recorded.And whether there was a nutritional risk in hospitalized patients and its association with clinical outcomes were investigated. Results: A total of 2 402 patients with malignancies were enrolled in this study. Seventy fourpatients who did not complete NRS2002 were eliminated, and 2 328 patients were included. The number of the main diseases was the top five, including 587 cases of colorectal cancer, 567 cases of lung cancer, 564 cases of gastric cancer, 146 cases of esophageal cancer, and 119 cases of liver tumor. At the time of discharge, compared with admission, the BMI, body weight, grip and calf circumferences of patients with malignant tumor were significantly decreased (P<0.05). The total protein, albumin, prealbumin and hemoglobin were significantly lower than those at admission (P<0.05). In 2 328 patients who were completed nutritional risk screening, the rate of malnutrition at admission was 11.1% (BMI =18.5, 258/2 328) and the rate of malnutrition at discharge was 10.9% (BMI =18.5, 254/2 328), there were no significant differences (χ(2)=0.019 7, P=0.888). There were 1 204 patients with nutritional risk at admission (51.7%, NRS2002 score≥3)and 1 352 patients with nutritional risk at discharge (58.1%, NRS2002 score≥3), with significant differences (χ(2)=49.9, P<0.001). The incidence of nutritional risk in patients with colorectal, stomach, and lung tumors at discharge was significantly higher than that at admission (P<0.05). The infective complications and other complications of patients with nutritional risk were significantly greater than those without nutritional risk at admission and at discharge.ICU hospitalization stay of patients with nutritional risk was increased significantly than those without nutritional risk at admission(P=0.042). Hospitalization expenses of patients with nutritional risk was increased significantly than those of patients without nutritional risk at discharge(P<0.01). Conclusion: The patients with malignant tumor have a higher incidence rate of malnutrition at both admission and discharge and malnutritionhas correlation with adverse clinical outcomes.The aboveindicators did not improve significantly at discharge.Doctors should pay more attention to the nutritional status (screening and evaluation)of patients before discharge and use appropriate and adequate nutrition support in order to prevent the weight loss and improve the life quality of patients.

Nutrition and the community-dwelling older person: a pilot study in general practice.

Nutrition is vital for health, and undernutrition can compromise physical and mental wellbeing. The prevalence of undernutrition among older community-dwelling adults attending general practice in Australia is not readily known. The aims of the study were to determine the prevalence of malnutrition of the elderly in Australian general practice, to assess malnutrition-related factors and to describe the older people's perception about nutrition. The study sample comprised 60 older people aged 75 years and above attending one general practice in South Australia. The combination of qualitative and quantitative data provided a more complete account of nutrition and its meaning for the older person. Three commonly used, validated nutritional screening tools were useful in determining undernutrition between 15 and 20% in a community population. One screening tool determined a 62% incidence of nutritional risk. Health characteristics determined almost 75% of participants identified at oral health risk. Frailty, medications and chronic disease were identified as factors associated with nutritional risk. Examination of older persons' perceptions about nutrition and wellbeing identified two major themes: older people have nutritional awareness but lack details, especially in relation to the benefits of protein intake, and there is limited awareness on the health benefits of good nutrition. This study confirms that nutritional risk is common in general practice. Understanding older person's perceptions of good nutrition is vital to be able to effectively change their nutritional status and plan amenable interventions. Screening practices with valid and reliable screening tools are imperative to ensure appropriate identification and management of older people at risk. WHAT THIS ARTICLE ADDS.

Analysis on nutritional risk screening and influencing factors of hospitalized patients in central urban area.

Rational nutritional support shall be based on nutritional screening and nutritional assessment. This study is aimed to explore nutritional risk screening and its influencing factors of hospitalized patients in central urban area. It is helpful for the early detection of problems in nutritional supports, nutrition management and the implementation of intervention measures, which will contribute a lot to improving the patient's poor clinical outcome. A total of three tertiary medical institutions were enrolled in this study. From October 2015 to June 2016, 1202 hospitalized patients aged ≥18 years were enrolled in Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 (NRS2002) for nutritional risk screening, including 8 cases who refused to participate, 5 cases of same-day surgery and 5 cases of coma. A single-factor chi-square test was performed on 312 patients with nutritional risk and 872 hospitalized patients without nutritional risk. Logistic regression analysis was performed with univariate analysis (P<0.05), to investigate the incidence of nutritional risk and influencing factors. The incidence of nutritional risk was 26.35% in the inpatients, 25.90% in male and 26.84% in female, respectively. The single-factor analysis showed that the age ≥60, sleeping disorder, fasting, intraoperative bleeding, the surgery in recent month, digestive diseases, metabolic diseases and endocrine system diseases had significant effects on nutritional risk (P<0.05). Having considered the above-mentioned factors as independent variables and nutritional risk (Y=1, N=0) as dependent variable, logistic regression analysis revealed that the age ≥60, fasting, sleeping disorders, the surgery in recent month and digestive diseases are hazardous factors for nutritional risk. Nutritional risk exists in hospitalized patients in central urban areas. Nutritional risk screening should be conducted for inpatients. Nutritional intervention programs should be formulated in consideration of those influencing factors, which enable to reduce the nutritional risk and to promote the rehabilitation of inpatients.

Nutritional risk is still a clinical predictor of postoperative outcomes in laparoscopic abdominal surgery

The relationship between nutritional risk and postoperative recovery of patients with major laparoscopic abdominal surgery is still unclear. The present study was designed to assess the value of the nutritional risk screening in predicting the postoperative outcomes in this cohort of patients. Data from a consecutive series of 75 patients undergoing various elective major laparoscopic abdominal operations was prospectively collected. Nutritional risk was defined by the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002) score and correlated to the incidence of postoperative complications and hospital stay. Multivariate regression identified factors associated with 30-day complications [odds ratio (95 % confidence interval)]. The overall incidence of nutritional risk was 34.7 %. There was a significantly higher infectious complication rate of 38.5 % in patients at nutritional risk, compared to 12.2 % in patients at no risk (p = 0.008). No significant difference of postoperative hospital stay and overall complications was found in patients at nutritional risk or not. Nutritional risk was identified as an independent predictor of postoperative infectious complications (odds ratio 4.87 [1.33-17.84]; p = 0.017). The present study reinforces the value of the NRS 2002 to identify patients at higher risk of infectious complications after major laparoscopic abdominal surgery. In the era of minimally invasive surgery, the problem of nutritional risk still deserves our attention and concern.

Effect of preoperative nutritional risk to postoperative nutritional status of elderly rectal cancer patients

Objective To investigate the effect of nutritional risk to nutritional status of peroperative elderly rectal cancer patients.Methods 85 elderly patients with rectal cancer were screened for preoperative nutritional status by NRS-2002 and divided into nutritional risk group and non-nutritional risk group.ALB,PALB,TLC and TFN of two groups were measured 1day before operation,1day and 7 days after operation.The values were compared between two groups.Results Before operation,25 patients out of 85 were at nutritional risk with NRS-2002≥3 and incidence of nutritional risk of 29.4％.The PALB value of the nutritional risk group was significantly lower than that of the non-nutritional risk group 1day after operation [(12.4±37)mg/L vs ( 14.3 ± 3.9 ) mg/L ;t =2.026,P＜0.05].After 7 days,the average levels of all indexes of the nutritional risk group were lower than those of the non-nutritional risk group.Among those,differences of ALB and TFN values between two groups were significant ( t =2.412,2.153,respectively; P ＜ 0.05 ).Conclusions Perioperative nutritional status of elderly rectal cancer patients at nutritional risk changes conspicuously and should be given relevant nutritional guidance by nurses. Key words: Elderly patients; Rectal cancer; Nutritional risk screening; Nutritional status

Preoperative nutritional risk screening and application of nutritional support in patients undergoing hepatobiliary surgery

Objective To provide reference for rational nutritional support by investigating the incidence of preoperative nutritional riskd and the clinical use of nutritional support in patients undergoing hepatobiliary surgery. Methods The patients who had been hospitalized due to hepatobiliary surgery during the period of January 2009 to April 2011 were consecutively enrolled in this study. Nutritional Risk Screening 2002(NRS2002)was conducted on the next morning after admission and the preoperative nutritional support was surveyed. The relationship of nutritional risks with nutritional support was analyzed. Nutritional risk was defined as NRS2002 score ≥ 3. Nutritional therapy included parenteral and enteral nutrition. Results A total of 125 patients were enrolled, and NRS2002 scoring was conducted in all the patients. The total incidence of nutritional risk was 20. 8%. The nutritional risk was significantly higher in the elderly patients(≥65 years old)than in those younger than 64 years(P＜ 0.05). 14 of 26 patients(53.8%)with a score ≥3 received nutrition support while 5 of 26(5.1%)with a score ＜ 3 received nutritional support. The ratio of parenteral nutrition to enteral nutrition was 2. 0 ∶ 1. Conclusions NRS2002 is suitable for the assessment of nutritional risk in patients undergoing hepatobiliary surgery. A proportion of patients were at nutritional risk. The use of nutritional support is currently somehow inappropriate. Evidence-based guidelines are required to improve this situation. Key words: Nutritional risk; Nutritional support; Nutritional risk screening 2002; Hepatobiliary surgery

Assessment of a novel screening score for nutritional risk in predicting complications in gastro-intestinal surgery

Malnutrition is a recognized risk factor for perioperative morbidity, but there is currently no standardized definition of malnutrition. The Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 score was recently proposed to identify patients at nutritional risk who may benefit from nutritional support therapy, and has been officially adopted by the European Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. The aim of this study was to assess the value of the Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 score in predicting the incidence and severity of postoperative complications in gastrointestinal surgery. We prospectively evaluated 608 patients admitted for elective gastrointestinal surgery. Nutritional risk was defined by the Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 score and correlated to the incidence and severity of postoperative complications. Complications were classified using an established surgical complication classification. The overall incidence of nutritional risk was 14%. We observed a significantly higher complication rate of 40% (35 out of 87) in patients at nutritional risk, compared to 15% (81 out of 521) in patients with a normal score (p<0.001). The incidence of severe complications was significantly higher in patients at nutritional risk (54% versus 15%; p<0.001). The odds ratio to develop a complication was 2.8 in patients at risk (p=0.001), and 3.0 in patients with malignant disease (p<0.001). The median length of stay in nutritional risk patients was significantly longer (10 versus 4 days, p<0.001). The prevalence of nutritional risk patients in gastrointestinal surgery is high. We showed that nutritional risk screening using the NRS 2002 strongly predicts the incidence and severity of complications.