Adult Malnutrition (Undernutrition) Screening: An Evidence Analysis Center Systematic Review

Malnutrition is a common occurrence in cancer. Early detection of malnutrition is imperative but often overlooked in busy clinical routine. This study aimed to assess the agreement between malnutri...

Agreement between the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool and the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment for Cancer Outpatients Receiving Chemotherapy: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Malnutrition is prevalent among hospitalized patients in developed countries, contributing to negative health outcomes and increased healthcare costs. Timely identification and management of malnutrition are crucial. The lack of a universally accepted definition and standardized diagnostic criteria for malnutrition has led to the development of various screening tools, each with varying validity. This complicates early identification of malnutrition, hindering effective intervention strategies. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify the most valid and reliable nutritional screening tool for assessing the risk of malnutrition in hospitalized adults.A systematic literature search was conducted to identify validation studies published from inception to November 2023, in the Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases. This systematic review was registered in INPLASY (INPLASY202090028). The risk of bias and quality of included studies were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies version 2 (QUADAS-2). Meta-analyses were performed for screening tools accuracy using the symmetric hierarchical summary receiver operative characteristics models.Of the 1646 articles retrieved, 60 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review, and 21 were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 51 malnutrition risk screening tools and 9 reference standards were identified. The meta-analyses assessed four common malnutrition risk screening tools against two reference standards (Subjective Global Assessment [SGA] and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism [ESPEN] criteria). The Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) vs SGA had a sensitivity (95% Confidence Interval) of 0.84 (0.73-0.91), and specificity of 0.85 (0.75-0.91). The MUST vs ESPEN had a sensitivity of 0.97 (0.53-0.99) and specificity of 0.80 (0.50-0.94). The Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST) vs SGA had a sensitivity of 0.81 (0.67-0.90) and specificity of 0.79 (0.72-0.74). The Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form (MNA-SF) vs ESPEN had a sensitivity of 0.99 (0.41-0.99) and specificity of 0.60 (0.45-0.73). The Nutrition Universal Screening Tool-2002 (NRS-2002) vs SGA had a sensitivity of 0.76 (0.58-0.87) and specificity of 0.86 (0.76-0.93).The MUST demonstrated high accuracy in detecting malnutrition risk in hospitalized adults. However, the quality of the studies included varied greatly, possibly introducing bias in the results. Future research should compare tools within a specific patient population using a valid and universal gold standard to ensure improved patient care and outcomes. 

Validity of nutrition screening tools for risk of malnutrition among hospitalized adult patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Shifting to models of care that incorporate delegation of nutrition care process actions to dietitian assistants could facilitate effective and efficient nutrition care delivery. This review aimed to determine if delegation of malnutrition care activities to dietitian assistants, when compared with routine nutrition care practices influences patient, healthcare and/or workforce outcomes for adult hospital inpatients with or at risk of malnutrition. This review was undertaken in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, with five databases (CINAHL, Medline, PsycINFO, Embase and Scopus) searched systematically for studies published up to and including February 2020. Exclusion criteria included review articles and studies conducted in community settings. The search yielded 3431 results, with 11 studies eligible for inclusion. Across all domains of the nutrition care process, there is emerging evidence dietitian assistants may improve the delivery of nutrition care practices, patient, healthcare and workforce outcomes. Findings demonstrated various roles and scope of dietitian assistants' practice throughout the studies. Positive patient outcomes were found when dietitian assistants were part of a multi-disciplinary model of care. Implementing delegation of components of the nutrition care process to dietitian assistants is vital in the current health climate and should be considered in a future multidisciplinary model of nutrition care. Exploration of dietitian assistant roles and opportunities are required to expand and strengthen the evidence.

Dietitian assistant opportunities within the nutrition care process for patients with or at risk of malnutrition: a systematic review.

s 74 full-text articles assessed for eligibility 58 Full-text articles excluded, with reasons:

Sensitivity and Specificity of Malnutrition Screening Tools Used in the Adult Hospitalized Patient Setting: A Systematic Review

Aim: Nutrition screening is increasingly conducted in hospitals during the patient admission process. We aimed to explore the ease of use of two tools in the conduct of screening by nutrition technicians (NTs), and to compare validity. The tools are Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) and Modified Malnutrition Screening Tool (Mod-MST).

Methods:  A sample of 262 consecutive adult hospital patients in medical wards was screened during December 2008 to January 2009. Trained NTs used both tools to screen each patient. Dietitians who were blinded to screening results then assessed each patient using Subjective Global Assessment as a reference tool. Time taken for screening was recorded and ease of tool use was explored in interviews with technicians.

Results:  The specificity of MUST and Mod-MST was 85% and 83%, respectively, with sensitivity of 80% and 77%. Both tools were easy to use and could be applied to all patients, including those unable to answer interview questions. However, the MUST took two to three times longer to complete (5–7 min) using objective data. The Mod-MST collected subjective data that required interpretation by technicians.

Conclusion:  Specificity and sensitivity of the two tools were less than optimum at ≤85%, as some patients would be misclassified. Both tools were valid and feasible to use with all medical patients, including those with whom communication cannot be established. The Mod-MST is recommended, as choice of malnutrition screening tool needs to balance efficacy with time taken to be useful for mass screening programs.

Identifying malnutrition risk in acute medical patients: Validity and utility of Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool and Modified Malnutrition Screening Tool

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Christopher Ku

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Identifying malnutrition risk in acute medical patients: Validity and utility of Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool and Modified Malnutrition Screening Tool