Sensitivity and specificity of malnutrition screening tools used in the adult hospitalized patient setting a systematic review

Mary E. Platek, Dorijn F L Hertroijs, Joseph M. Nicholson, Niyati Parekh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Adult hospitalized patients are at risk for malnutrition. The sensitivity and specificity of screening tools were compared with Subjective Global Assessment. Methods included a systematic review using PubMed, CINAHL Plus, and EMBASE through April 2014. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies method. The results showed that the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool, Nutrition Risk Screening-2002, and Malnutrition Screening Tool were most frequently tested. The specificity was generally good (>80%), but sensitivity was variable. Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool, Nutrition Risk Screening-2002, and Malnutrition Screening Tool are screening tools that consider population characteristics and risk cut points and are easy to administer. Key words: malnutrition, nutrition assessment, nutrition screening, sensitivity and specificity, subjective global assessment, undernutrition.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)289-301
Number of pages13
JournalTopics in Clinical Nutrition
Volume30
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 20 2015

Fingerprint

Malnutrition
Sensitivity and Specificity
Nutrition Assessment
Population Characteristics
PubMed

Keywords

  • Malnutrition
  • Nutrition assessment
  • Nutrition screening
  • Sensitivity and specificity
  • Subjective global assessment
  • Undernutrition

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nutrition and Dietetics

Cite this

Sensitivity and specificity of malnutrition screening tools used in the adult hospitalized patient setting a systematic review. / Platek, Mary E.; Hertroijs, Dorijn F L; Nicholson, Joseph M.; Parekh, Niyati.

In: Topics in Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 30, No. 4, 20.10.2015, p. 289-301.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b056813481a041ada6017a0b48f2f52c,
title = "Sensitivity and specificity of malnutrition screening tools used in the adult hospitalized patient setting a systematic review",
abstract = "Adult hospitalized patients are at risk for malnutrition. The sensitivity and specificity of screening tools were compared with Subjective Global Assessment. Methods included a systematic review using PubMed, CINAHL Plus, and EMBASE through April 2014. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies method. The results showed that the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool, Nutrition Risk Screening-2002, and Malnutrition Screening Tool were most frequently tested. The specificity was generally good (>80{\%}), but sensitivity was variable. Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool, Nutrition Risk Screening-2002, and Malnutrition Screening Tool are screening tools that consider population characteristics and risk cut points and are easy to administer. Key words: malnutrition, nutrition assessment, nutrition screening, sensitivity and specificity, subjective global assessment, undernutrition.",
keywords = "Malnutrition, Nutrition assessment, Nutrition screening, Sensitivity and specificity, Subjective global assessment, Undernutrition",
author = "Platek, {Mary E.} and Hertroijs, {Dorijn F L} and Nicholson, {Joseph M.} and Niyati Parekh",
year = "2015",
month = "10",
day = "20",
doi = "10.1097/TIN.0000000000000046",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "30",
pages = "289--301",
journal = "Topics in Clinical Nutrition",
issn = "0883-5691",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Sensitivity and specificity of malnutrition screening tools used in the adult hospitalized patient setting a systematic review

AU - Platek, Mary E.

AU - Hertroijs, Dorijn F L

AU - Nicholson, Joseph M.

AU - Parekh, Niyati

PY - 2015/10/20

Y1 - 2015/10/20

N2 - Adult hospitalized patients are at risk for malnutrition. The sensitivity and specificity of screening tools were compared with Subjective Global Assessment. Methods included a systematic review using PubMed, CINAHL Plus, and EMBASE through April 2014. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies method. The results showed that the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool, Nutrition Risk Screening-2002, and Malnutrition Screening Tool were most frequently tested. The specificity was generally good (>80%), but sensitivity was variable. Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool, Nutrition Risk Screening-2002, and Malnutrition Screening Tool are screening tools that consider population characteristics and risk cut points and are easy to administer. Key words: malnutrition, nutrition assessment, nutrition screening, sensitivity and specificity, subjective global assessment, undernutrition.

AB - Adult hospitalized patients are at risk for malnutrition. The sensitivity and specificity of screening tools were compared with Subjective Global Assessment. Methods included a systematic review using PubMed, CINAHL Plus, and EMBASE through April 2014. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies method. The results showed that the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool, Nutrition Risk Screening-2002, and Malnutrition Screening Tool were most frequently tested. The specificity was generally good (>80%), but sensitivity was variable. Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool, Nutrition Risk Screening-2002, and Malnutrition Screening Tool are screening tools that consider population characteristics and risk cut points and are easy to administer. Key words: malnutrition, nutrition assessment, nutrition screening, sensitivity and specificity, subjective global assessment, undernutrition.

KW - Malnutrition

KW - Nutrition assessment

KW - Nutrition screening

KW - Sensitivity and specificity

KW - Subjective global assessment

KW - Undernutrition

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84945120271&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84945120271&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/TIN.0000000000000046

DO - 10.1097/TIN.0000000000000046

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84945120271

VL - 30

SP - 289

EP - 301

JO - Topics in Clinical Nutrition

JF - Topics in Clinical Nutrition

SN - 0883-5691

IS - 4

ER -