PhilSPEN Online Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition

Back to Total Names Codes

(Article 79 | POJ_0073)

Submitted Abstracts

PENSA 2017 Congress

Submitted: August 12, 2017

Abstract ID = 43 | Classification: (2) - Malnutrition and related issues

Title: Comparison of 3 tools to assess nutrition risk in Intensive care unit- Is SGA a better tool?

Author(s): D. Redha, N. Priya (2), Shankar B (1)

Institution where study was conducted: Department of Dietetics, Apollo First Med Hospitals, Chennai, India

Keywords: Subjective Global assessment ( SGA), Nutrition Risk Screening( NRS), ICU- Intensive care unit

Background: Screening, assessment and identifying patients at nutrition risk proves difficult in the Intensive care unit (ICU) due to the nature of critical illness.

Objectives: The purpose of the study was to compare ICU patients at nutrition risk using 3 different tools.

Methods: A prospective study was conducted in MDCCU between January to April 2017.Nutrition risk was assessed using the Subjective Global Assessment( SGA), Nutrition Risk Screening NRS(2002) and Nutrition Risk in critically ill (NUTRIC) score. Patient demographics, disease severity scores & clinical outcome were noted. Statistical analysis done using SPSS 20.

Results: A total of 70 patients with mean age of 57.25±20.13y and mean BMI 24.67kg/m² were included. 57% of patients were well nourished using the SGA or there was no nutrition risk using NRS (2002).43% of patients were malnourished as per the SGA and NRS(2002) and only 30% were at high risk according to the Nutric score. All the 3 tools indicated 15.7% were at nutrition risk or malnourished.Patients malnourished using the SGA score had significantly high ICU LOS 8.4±11.38 days(p<0.01) compared to patients who were at high risk using the Nutric score 6.47±9.61days (p<0.01) and NRS (2002)8.1±11.42days (p<0.01).

Conclusion: Screening and assessment tools used, identified different patients as malnourished or at nutrition risk in the ICU. Patients identified as malnourished using the SGA had an increased LOS ICU. Mortality was not significant in patients who had a higher risk with Nutric score. SGA can be considered as an easy beside tool to identify patients at risk of malnutrition.