Malnutrition is a global health problem that is not limited to developing countries. So far, it is one of the underdiagnosed and curative medical problems. THE AIM of our observation was to evaluate the nutritional status of patients at risk of malnutrition.
METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 140 patients from the Gastroenterology Clinic and the Center for Home Parenteral Nutrition (HPN) at the University Hospital Bratislava, Slovakia. Patients were indicated for examination as part of the entry screening for malnutrition or consultation examination in patients presenting with signs of malnutrition. Based on the determination of the body mass index (BMI), the completed questionnaire of nutritional risk screening (NRS) and the determination of the state of performance, we evaluated the nutritional status of the patient and subsequently started enteral, or parenteral nutrition.
RESULTS: We recorded a statistically significant negative correlation between BMI and malnutrition risk (p<0.001), ie. the lower the BMI, the higher the risk of malnutrition. We did not observe a relationship between age, diagnoses and the incidence of BMI-related malnutrition in the study group of patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Properly applied clinical nutrition, whether enteral, parenteral, or a combination thereof, can significantly affect morbidity and mortality in patients with malnutrition or the risk of its development. Unfortunately, Slovakia is still lagging behind developed countries in its implementation as part of a comprehensive treatment of patients (Tab. 2, Fig. 4, Ref. 28).

UNASSIGNED: Malnutrition is prevalent among cancer patients, smartphone-based self-administered nutritional assessment tools offer a promising solution for effective nutritional screening. This study aims to retrospectively analyze the relationships between nutritional status evaluated by the digital tool (R+ Dietitian) and clinicopathologic factors of cancer patients.
UNASSIGNED: Cancer patients who met the inclusion criteria were divided into two subgroups based on age, Nutritional Risk Screening-2002, Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment Short Form, body mass index, and hospital stays for comparison. Correlation and regression analysis were used to comprehensively assess the relationship between nutritional status and clinicopathologic factors.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 535 hospitalized cancer patients (58.32 ± 11.24 years old) were recruited. Patients identified with nutritional risk assessed by R+ Dietitian were significantly older, had lower body weight, lower body mass index, greater weight loss, and longer hospital stays (all of above, P < 0.01). Multiple logistic regression analysis indicated that serum prealbumin concentration (odds ratio: 0.992, 95% confidence interval: 0.987-0.997, P = 0.001), weight loss (odds ratio: 7.309, 95% confidence interval: 4.026-13.270, P < 0.001), and body mass index < 18.5 (odds ratio: 5.882, 95% confidence interval: 2.695-12.821, P < 0.001) predicted nutritional risk indicated by Nutritional Risk Screening-2002 score ≥3. Hemoglobin concentration (odds ratio: 0.983, 95% confidence interval: 0.970-0.996, P = 0.011), weight (odds ratio: 1.111, 95% confidence interval: 1.056-1.169, P < 0.001), weight loss (odds ratio: 7.502, 95% confidence interval: 4.394-12.810, P < 0.001), body mass index (odds ratio: 0.661, 95% confidence interval: 0.564-0.775, P < 0.001), and energy intake (odds ratio: 0.996, 95% confidence interval: 0.995-0.997, P < 0.001) predicted nutritional risk indicated by Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment Short Form score ≥4. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment Short Form scores ≥3 (b = 2.032, P = 0.008) were significantly associated with longer hospital stays.
UNASSIGNED: The nutritional risks assessed by R+ Dietitian accurately reflected the characteristics of malnutrition in cancer patients and predicted hospital stay and cost, indicating the applicability of R+ Dietitian to improving the efficiency of nutritional management for cancer patients.

Hospital malnutrition remains a significant public health issue, particularly in developing countries. The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) proposed homogenizing criteria to standardize malnutrition diagnosis. This study aimed to retrospectively determine the prevalence of nutritional risk and malnutrition diagnoses among hospitalized patients using the Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS)-2002 screening instrument and the GLIM criteria, respectively. We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional study from nutritional records of patients hospitalized in a single centre 2021. Nutrition data from records included medical diagnosis, gender, length of stay, age, weight, height, body mass index, weight loss, calf circumference, and middle upper arm circumference. Nutritional risk and malnutrition were evaluated using NRS-2002 and GLIM criteria. Its concordance was further evaluated by using a Kappa test. The study included 616 records of patients; 52.3% (n = 322) of the population were male. The prevalence of nutritional risk, according to NRS-2002, was 69.5% (n = 428). Nutritional risk as well as malnutrition diagnosis according to GLIM criteria was observed in 87.8% (n = 374) of patienttritional risk and malnutrition were evaluated using NRS-2002 and GLIM criteria. Its concordance was further evaluated by using a Kappa test. Ws. Tools showed a strong concordance (κ= 0.732). All anthropometric data, except for height, were found to be significantly different between patients with moderate and severe malnutrition (p < 0.05). Our findings highlight a high prevalence of malnutrition in this group of hospitalized patients in Mexico. NRS-2002 demonstrated good agreement with the diagnosis of malnutrition according to GLIM criteria and could be considered part of the straightforward two-step approach for malnutrition; however, further studies are needed.

Nutritional screening tools have proven valuable for predicting clinical outcomes but have failed to determine which patients would be most likely to benefit from nourishment interventions. The Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS) and the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) are 2 of these tools, which are based on both nutritional parameters and parameters reflecting disease severity.
We hypothesized that the adaptation of nutritional risk scores, by removing parameters reflecting disease severity, would improve their predictive value regarding response to a nutritional intervention while providing similar prognostic information regarding mortality at short and long terms.
We reanalyzed data of 2028 patients included in the Swiss-wide multicenter, randomized controlled trial EFFORT (Effect of early nutritional therapy on Frailty, Functional Outcomes, and Recovery of malnourished medical inpatients Trial) comparing individualized nutritional support with usual care nutrition in medical inpatients. The primary endpoint was 30-d all-cause mortality.
Although stratifying patients by high compared with low NRS score showed no difference in response to nutritional support, patients with high adapted NRS showed substantial benefit, whereas patients with low adapted NRS showed no survival benefit [adjusted hazard ratio: 0.55 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.37, 0.80]] compared with 1.17 (95% CI: 0.70, 1.93), a finding that was significant in an interaction analysis [coefficient: 0.48 (95% CI: 0.25, 0.94), P = 0.031]. A similar effect regarding treatment response was found when stratifying patients on the basis of MNA compared with the adapted MNA. Regarding the prognostic performance, both original scores were slightly superior in predicting mortality than the adapted scores.
Adapting the NRS and MNA by including nutritional parameters only improves their ability to predict response to a nutrition intervention, but slightly reduces their overall prognostic performance. Scores dependent on disease severity may best be considered prognostic scores, whereas nutritional risk scores not including parameters reflecting disease severity may indeed improve a more personalized treatment approach for nourishment interventions. The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02517476.

UNASSIGNED: As a chronic wasting disease, cancer can lead to metabolic and physiological changes in patients, resulting in severe malnutrition. Therefore, accurate assessment of nutritional status and adoption of scientifically sound nutritional interventions are of great importance for patients with cancer. This study aimed to assess the necessity of implementing the Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002) tool in conjunction with the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) in patients with cancer.
UNASSIGNED: This retrospective study collected the clinical data of cancer patients from November 2011 to December 2018 in the Department of Oncology, Cancer Center, First Hospital of Jilin University. The NRS 2002 and the PG-SGA were used as screening tools for malnutrition. Clinical characteristics and laboratory results were detected. Anthropometric indices including hand-grip strength (HGS), visceral fat area (VFA), calf circumstance (CC), and appendicular skeletal muscle mass index (ASMI) were also collected. The diagnostic results from the NRS 2002 were compared to the malnutrition diagnosis using the PG-SGA.
UNASSIGNED: Of the 2,645 patients included in this retrospective study, the nutritional risk was found in 1763 (66.6%) patients based on the PG-SGA, and in 240 (9.1%) patients based on the NRS 2002, respectively. Among the 240 patients evaluated by the NRS 2002 for risk of malnutrition, 230 were also assessed by the PG-SGA as malnourished. There were no significant differences observed in the clinical characteristics and laboratory parameters between the two groups.
UNASSIGNED: The PG-SGA is effective and had a higher positive rate in screening malnutrition for patients with cancer. The NRS 2002 is not necessary for patients who are to be assessed with the PG-SGA.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the effect of standard nutritional support based on nutritional risk screening on nutrition conditions and living quality in glioma patients after surgery.
METHODS: The clinical information of 100 patients with glioma treated at the Sichuan Provincial People\'s Hospital from April 2021 to April 2022 was reviewed retrospectively. Among them, 39 patients received routine nutritional support during the perioperative period (routing group) and 61 patients received standard nutritional support (standard group). The relevant clinical data were collected, and the postoperative albumin (ALB) level, prealbumin (PA) level, hemoglobin (Hb) level, patient-generated subjective global assessment (PG-SGA) score, Kanofsky performance score (KPS), and short-term prognosis were compared between the two groups. Finally, factors affecting the efficacy of nutritional support in patients with glioma were analyzed.
RESULTS: 14 days after the surgery, the levels of ALB, PA, and Hb of the standard group were significantly higher than those in the routing group (all P < 0.05). The PG-SGA scores of the two groups decreased with time, and the PG-SGA scores of the standard group were significantly lower than those of the routing group at 30 d and 60 d after the operation (intergroup effect: F = 9.077, P = 0.003, time effect: F = 75.28, P < 0.001, and interaction effect: F = 3.111, P = 0.047). The KPS scores of the two groups increased with time, and the KPS scores of the standard group were significantly higher than those of the routing group at 30 d and 60 d after operation (intergroup effect: F = 4.458, P = 0.044, time effect: F = 31.333, P < 0.001, and interaction effect: F = 3.507, P = 0.032). Within 6 months after discharge, the tumor recurrence rate of the standard group was significantly lower than that in the routing group (P < 0.05). After 60 days of the surgery, nutritional support therapy worked well in 32 patients, and the results of the logistic regression analysis displayed that age was an independent factor affecting the efficacy of nutritional support in post-operative glioma patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Standard nutritional support based on nutritional risk screening can improve the nutrition condition and living quality of post-operative glioma patients and is worthy of clinical application.

To investigate nutritional risk across children in their first 2 years at child health care clinics in Jiangsu, China, and to highlight the importance of nutritional risk screening in outpatient clinics.
A multi-centre, cross-sectional, observational study was conducted among outpatients in child health care clinics. Nutritional risk screening using the STRONGkids tool and anthropometric assessments were performed on children under 2 years old at outpatient initial visits in ten hospitals from March 2021 to March 2022.
There were 11,454 children enrolled. The percentages of children with high, moderate and low nutritional risk were 2.0% (228), 28.2% (3229) and 69.8% (7997), respectively. The occurrence rate of high nutritional risk was higher in female children than in male children (p < 0.05). The incidence of moderate nutritional risk in infants was significantly higher than in children aged ≥12 months (p < 0.01). Children with moderate or high nutritional risk more frequently answered \'yes\' to the STRONGkids item \'high risk disease or major surgery planned\'. The top three diagnoses related to nutritional risk were prematurity (50.5%), food allergy (14.3%) and recurrent respiratory disease (10.7%). In addition, the incidence of chronic undernutrition in children with moderate (14.0%) or high nutritional risk (36.4%) was significantly higher than acute undernutrition (p < 0.01).
Among children up to 2 years of age seen in child health clinics, nutritional risk associated with prematurity and potential disease requires special attention. Nutritional risk screening should be part of child health care, and STRONGkids is a useful screening tool.

Nutritional risk is prevalent, and it develops negatively during hospital stay. The aim of this cohort study was to assess the association of nutritional risk with total costs of hospital care, length of stay, and in-hospital mortality.
Cross-sectional study with hospitalized patients (n = 3053). Nutritional risk screening 2002 and outcome were investigated. Chi-square, Fisher, and Mann-Whitney tests, univariable and multivariable generalized linear and binary logistic regression models were used.
Nutritional risk was detected in 18% (184/1024) of those patients assessed at admission while the number of patients at risk increased 3-fold (47%,152/265) in those screened 14 days after admission (odds ratio 6.25; 95% CI 4.58-8.53, p < 0.001). Nutritionally at-risk patients had 5.6 days longer length of stay (p < 0.001) and 9% higher adjusted total costs compared with non-risk patients (p < 0.001). Adjusted overall risk for in-hospital mortality was 4.4 (95% CI 2.44-7.92, p < 0.001) for patients at nutritional risk. The screening rate was between 52% and 68%, and only 4% of the nutritionally at-risk patients had dietitian consultation during their hospital stay.
The number of patients with nutritional risk increased clearly during hospitalization associating with a four times higher in-hospital mortality and substantially increased hospital costs. The results demonstrate that the nutritional risk and its detrimental influence on the outcome increases during hospitalization emphasizing the importance to screen patients at admission and repeated weekly.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we investigated the prevalence of malnutrition and analyzed the related factors among patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) undergoing radiotherapy.
METHODS: We included 108 patients with head and neck cancer undergoing radiotherapy from the oncology and thoracic surgery departments of a comprehensive medical center in Qingdao between January 2019 and June 2020. We used the Nutritional Risk Screening-2002 tool (NRS-2002) to evaluate their nutritional status during radiotherapy. We analyzed the basic sociodemographic information and laboratory indicators of the respondents to examine the impact of these factors on nutritional status.
RESULTS: In the 108 patients that we studied, those aged ≥65 years had a significantly higher nutritional risk when compared to patients <65 years of age (P < 0.05). Univariate analysis revealed that a late tumor stage (P = 0.039), the neck being the site of radiotherapy (P = 0.009), the presence of diabetes (P < 0.001), and the presence of anxiety and depression (P = 0.002) were associated with nutritional risks for patients with head and neck cancer undergoing radiotherapy. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified a late tumor stage, the neck being the radiotherapy site, and combined anxiety and depression as nutritional risk factors in such patients.
CONCLUSIONS: We found a high incidence of malnutrition in patients undergoing radiotherapy for HNC; this highlights the importance of early identification of patients at risk and evaluation of related risk factors to enhance the efficacy of nutritional interventions.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2022.1033265.].