Preliminary investigation on the prevalence of nutritional risk and malnutrition in cancer patients using NRS 2002 and malnutrition diagnosis (GLIM) criteria in a tertiary (A) teaching hospital in Chongqing

陈曦,杨剑,林晓倩,严宏佳,黄娟,刘红,李澳,张献娜,李小萌,李卫,路潜,蒋朱明
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn115822-20200509-00127
2020-01-01
Abstract:Objective:To perform a cross-sectional study in a small sample of cancer patients using three nutritional diagnosis or assessment tools including Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria.Methods:The hospitalized patients with malignant tumors in Department of Oncology and Department of Thoracic Surgery in The Third Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University were selected from February 2019 to May 2019 via cluster sampling. Nutritional risk was screened using NRS 2002. Three methods including GLIM criteria were also applied in the assessment of malnutrition in patients.Results:Among 449 patients with malignant tumors, 85 cases were at nutritional risk as per NRS 2002, amounting to a prevalence of 18.9%. There were 28 cases (6.2%) assessed as malnutrition as per low body mass index (BMI) criteria (BMI<18.5 kg/m 2+ impaired general condition) and 50 cases (11.1%) as per NRS 2002 (≥3 scores for impaired nutrition status). However, 52 cases (11.6%) were diagnosed as malnutrition as per GLIM criteria, which was significantly different with the results as per BMI criteria ( P<0.05). Further analysis of 52 GLIM positive cases showed: for etiologic criteria, reduced food intake or assimilation was present in 49 (94.2%) cases and disease burden/inflammation was present in 52 (100%) cases; for phenotypic criteria, non-volitional weight loss, 39 (75.0%) cases and low BMI, 19 (36.5%) cases; 34 cases were assessed as with severe malnutrition according to the severity grading step in GLIM criteria. Conclusions:In this study, the positive rate of nutritional risk screening was 18.9%; the prevalence of malnutrition assessed as per BMI criteria, NRS 2002, and GLIM criteria, was 6.2%, 11.1% and 11.6%, respectively. According to the above three criteria, there may be mutually limiting differences in the diagnosis or assessment of malnutrition among cancer patients in this study.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?