Comparison of CIPA Nutritional Screening with GLIM Criteria for Malnutrition, Prognostic Evolution, and Association with Phase Angle in Hospitalized Patients

Elena Márquez Mesa,Adán Jesús Guerra Cabrera,Ignacio Llorente Gómez de Segura,José Pablo Suárez Llanos
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16213652
IF: 5.9
2024-10-27
Nutrients
Abstract:Background: Hospital malnutrition has high prevalence and is associated with worse clinical outcomes. The lack of standardized nutritional screening prompted the creation of the CIPA screening tool. Several studies have shown that the phase angle (PA) is associated with increased nutritional risk and worse clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to establish the concordance between the CIPA and GLIM criteria and to assess their correlation with PA values and clinical outcomes. Methods: A cross-sectional single-center study was carried out, with a prospective six-month follow-up for the prognostic variables. On admission, the CIPA and GLIM criteria and bioimpedanciometry were assessed. Results: A total of 510 inpatients were included; 36.5% had positive CIPA outcomes and 46.1% had positive GLIM outcomes. The correlation between the CIPA and GLIM criteria had a kappa index of 0.26, p 65 years: 4.75°, men ≤ 65 years: 5.75°, women > 65 years: 4.75°, and women ≤ 65 years: 5.45°) and GLIM (men > 65 years: 4.95°, men ≤ 65 years: 5.85°, women > 65 years: 4.75°, and women ≤ 65 years: 5.55°). These PA cut-off points were associated with worse clinical outcomes with CIPA (mortality OR = 4.2; MLS OR = 1.51; readmissions OR = 2.28) and GLIM (mortality OR = 2.97; MLS OR = 2.61; readmissions OR = 1.79). Conclusions: CIPA screening shows a low correlation with GLIM nutritional assessment. Positive CIPA and GLIM have lower PAs than negative and worse prognostic outcomes. The PA cut-off points associated with worse outcomes have been established.
nutrition & dietetics
What problem does this paper attempt to address?