» Articles » PMID: 23688831

Nutrition Screening Tools: Does One Size Fit All? A Systematic Review of Screening Tools for the Hospital Setting

Overview
Journal Clin Nutr
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2013 May 22
PMID 23688831
Citations 146
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background & Aims: Numerous nutrition screening tools for the hospital setting have been developed. The aim of this systematic review is to study construct or criterion validity and predictive validity of nutrition screening tools for the general hospital setting.

Methods: A systematic review of English, French, German, Spanish, Portuguese and Dutch articles identified via MEDLINE, Cinahl and EMBASE (from inception to the 2nd of February 2012). Additional studies were identified by checking reference lists of identified manuscripts. Search terms included key words for malnutrition, screening or assessment instruments, and terms for hospital setting and adults. Data were extracted independently by 2 authors. Only studies expressing the (construct, criterion or predictive) validity of a tool were included.

Results: 83 studies (32 screening tools) were identified: 42 studies on construct or criterion validity versus a reference method and 51 studies on predictive validity on outcome (i.e. length of stay, mortality or complications). None of the tools performed consistently well to establish the patients' nutritional status. For the elderly, MNA performed fair to good, for the adults MUST performed fair to good. SGA, NRS-2002 and MUST performed well in predicting outcome in approximately half of the studies reviewed in adults, but not in older patients.

Conclusions: Not one single screening or assessment tool is capable of adequate nutrition screening as well as predicting poor nutrition related outcome. Development of new tools seems redundant and will most probably not lead to new insights. New studies comparing different tools within one patient population are required.

Citing Articles

Multicentre prospective study on the diagnostic and prognostic validity of malnutrition assessment tools in surgery.

Petra G, Kritsotakis E, Gouvas N, Schizas D, Toutouzas K, Karanikas M Br J Surg. 2025; 112(2).

PMID: 40037524 PMC: 11879291. DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znaf013.


Response to "Comment on Prevalence and Influencing Factors of Malnutrition in Diabetic Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis".

Zhang T, Ma Y, Han L J Diabetes. 2025; 17(3):e70066.

PMID: 40025977 PMC: 11873535. DOI: 10.1111/1753-0407.70066.


Sensitivity and Specificity of Three Measures of Intrinsic Capacity in Older People Aged 80 and Over in Nursing Homes.

Ma L, Zheng E, Fang Y, Chen H, Zhou C, Cai S Clin Interv Aging. 2025; 19:2179-2194.

PMID: 39759395 PMC: 11699827. DOI: 10.2147/CIA.S486663.


The association between nutrition risk status assessment and hospital mortality in Chinese older inpatients: a retrospective study.

Liu J, He M, Zhang X, Zeng F, Mo H, Shen J J Health Popul Nutr. 2024; 43(1):229.

PMID: 39731201 PMC: 11681646. DOI: 10.1186/s41043-024-00726-w.


Nutrition, dietary recommendations, and supplements for patients with congenital heart disease.

Lorente M, Azpiroz M, Guedes P, Burgos R, Lluch A, Dos L Int J Cardiol Congenit Heart Dis. 2024; 12:100449.

PMID: 39711821 PMC: 11657916. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcchd.2023.100449.