Can Nutritional Assessment Tools Predict Response to Nutritional Therapy?
- 575 Downloads
Traditional tools and scoring systems for nutritional assessment have focused solely on parameters of poor nutritional status in the past, in an effort to define the elusive concept of malnutrition. Such tools fail to account for the contribution of disease severity to overall nutritional risk. High nutritional risk, caused by either deterioration of nutritional status or greater disease severity (or a combination of both factors), puts the patient in a metabolic stress state characterized by adverse outcome and increased complications. Newer scoring systems for determining nutritional risk, such as the Nutric Score and the Nutritional Risk Score-2002 have created a paradigm shift connecting assessment and treatment with quality outcome measures of success. Clinicians now have the opportunity to identify high risk patients through their initial assessment, provide adequate or sufficient nutrition therapy, and expect improved patient outcomes as a result. These concepts are supported by observational and prospective interventional trials. Greater clinical experience and refinement in these scoring systems are needed in the future to optimize patient response to nutrition therapy.
KeywordsMalnutrition Nutritional assessment Nutritional risk
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
- 2.••Kondrup J. Nutritional-risk scoring systems in the intensive care unit. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2014;17(2):177–82. This is a recent review by Kondrup of the principles behind the NRS-2002 scoring system, emphazing the evolution of the concept of nutritional risk. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 3.••Heyland, et al. Identifying critically ill patients who benefit the most from nutrition therapy: the development and initial validation of a novel risk assessment tool. Crit Care. 2011;15(6):R268. This is the original paper by Heyland delineating the NUTRIC Score system. Google Scholar
- 5.Omidvari AH, Vali Y, Murray SM, Wonderling D, Rashidian A. Nutritional screening for improving professional practice for patient outcomes in hospital and primary care settings. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;6:CD005539.Google Scholar
- 8.••Rahman A, Hasan RM, Agarwala R, Martin C, Day AG, Heyland DK. Identifying critically-ill patients who will benefit most from nutritional therapy: further validation of the “modified NUTRIC” nutritional risk assessment tool. Clin Nutr. 2015. This is an updated re-validated version of the NUTRIC score. Google Scholar
- 9.•Jie B, Jiang ZM, Nolan MT, Zhu SN, Yu K, Kondrup J. Impact of preoperative nutritional support on clinical outcome in abdominal surgical patients at nutritional risk. Nutrition. 2012;28(10):1022–7. This observational trial shows how high risk patients derive outcome benefits from sufficient nutritional therapy, while low risk patients do not. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Badia-Tahull MB, Cobo-Sacristán S, Leiva-Badosa E, Miquel-Zurita ME, Méndez-Cabalerio N, Jódar-Masanés R, et al. Use of subjective global assessment, patient-generated subjective global assessment and nutritional risk screening 2002 to evaluate the nutritional status of non-critically ill patients on parenteral nutrition. Nutr Hosp. 2014;29(2):411–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.Benoit M, Grass F, Demartines N, Coti-Bertrand P, Schäfer M, Hübner M. Use of the nutritional risk score by surgeons and nutritionists. Clin Nutr. 2016;35(1):230–3.Google Scholar