• S Christner, M Ritt, D Volkert, R Wirth, C C Sieber, and K-G Gaßmann.
• Department of Internal Medicine III (Medicine of Ageing), Geriatrics Centre Erlangen, Hospital of the Congregation of St Francis Sisters of Vierzehnheiligen, Erlangen, Germany.
• J Hum Nutr Diet. 2016 Dec 1; 29 (6): 704-713.

BackgroundThe present study aimed to evaluate a short-form (MNA-SF) version of the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), in which some of the items were operationalised, based on scores from tools used for a comprehensive geriatric assessment, as a method for analysing the nutritional status of hospitalised geriatric patients. We compared this MNA-SF version with the corresponding MNA long-form (MNA-LF) and Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002) in terms of completion rate, prevalence and agreement regarding malnutrition and/or the risk of this.MethodsIn total, 201 patients aged ≥65 years who were hospitalised in geriatric wards were included in this analysis.ResultsThe MNA-SF, MNA-LF and NRS 2002 were completed in 98.0%, 95.5% and 99.5% of patients (P = 0.06), respectively. The MNA-SF, MNA-LF and NRS 2002 categorised 93.4%, 91.1% and 66.0% of patients as being malnourished or at risk of being malnourished (P < 0.001). Agreement between the MNA-SF and MNA-LF was substantial (κ = 0.70, P < 0.001). No agreement between the MNA-SF and NRS 2002 was found (κ = -0.12, P < 0.001). Interestingly, NRS 2002 part 1 (prescreening) revealed a false negative rate of 21.0% (only in patients aged ≥70 years who showed moderate disease severity) in relation to the NRS 2002 part 2.ConclusionsThe MNA-SF version emerged as a useful tool for evaluating the nutritional status of hospitalised geriatric patients. The NRS 2002 part 1 showed limited value as a prescreening aid in relation to the NRS 2002 part 2 in the same group of patients.© 2016 The British Dietetic Association Ltd.

18 keywords...

hide…