Prideaux Nutritional Assessment Tool

• Nutrition Assessment Tool
• Prideaux Nutritional Assessment Tool For Elderly
• Prideaux Nutritional Assessment Tool For Older Adults

Nutritional Assessment. A screening tool developed by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in 2006 for both in-patients and out. This study sought to determine congruence between student assessment tasks within the master of chiropractic curriculum at Macquarie University and 2 separate but related domains: (1) disorders commonly presenting to chiropractors and (2) musculoskeletal conditions for which there is published evidence that chiropractic treatment is effective.

. 151 Downloads.SummaryOBJECTIVE: Despite intense clinical research, no commonly accepted diagnostic tool for assessment of nutritional status is yet available. In this study a comparison of four different methods for diagnosis of the nutritional status of patients admitted to a university hospital in Austria is presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical data of 640 hospitalised patients were analysed in a prospective-descriptive study design. Four recommended methods, the Innsbruck nutrition score (INS), the Prideaux nutritional risk assessment (PNRA), the well established nutrition risk index (NRI), and the body mass index (BMI) were used to analyse nutritional status.

RESULTS: The BMI showed 90.2% of the patients evaluated to have normal nutritional status, whereas the PNRA identified 48.9%, the NRI 40% and the INS 58.6% as well nourished. Patients were variously diagnosed with moderate malnutrition: 9% (BMI), 42% (PNRA), 54.8% (NRI) and 30% (INS). Severe malnutrition was detected in 0.5% (BMI), 9.1% (PNRA), 5.2% (NRI) and 11.4% (INS) of the patients evaluated. Cancer patients had the worst nutritional status. CONCLUSION: Malnutrition seems to be a common diagnosis among hospitalised patients in Austria. Screening and assessment of nutritional status should be integrated into clinical routine.

The methods tested scored malnutrition at different frequencies. BMI seemed to underestimate the prevalence of malnutrition. The PNRA provided some information on clinical outcome, whereas the NRI had the best relationship between the degree of malnutrition and length of stay. Calculation of the INS may give correct diagnosis of severe malnutrition. Further prospective clinical studies are needed to validate the scoring systems used in this study and to provide accurate clinical diagnosis of malnutrition. Oliver Galvan.

1. Michael Joannidis.

2. Andreas Widschwendter. 3.

Hugo Bonatti. 4.

Georg Matthias Sprinzl. 1. Peter Rehak.

5. Doris Balogh. 6. Johann Michael Hackl. 6.

1. Department of Otorhinolaryngology Innsbruck University Hospital Innsbruck Austria. 2. Department of Internal Medicine Innsbruck University Hospital Innsbruck Austria. 3. Department of Gynaecology Innsbruck University Hospital Innsbruck Austria.

4. Department of Surgery Innsbruck University Hospital Innsbruck. 5.

Department of Medical Technology and Data Processing University of Graz Graz Austria. 6. Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine Innsbruck University Hospital Innsbruck AustriaAbout this article.

Nutrition Assessment Tool

Abstract OBJECTIVE: Despite intense clinical research, no commonly accepted diagnostic tool for assessment of nutritional status is yet available. In this study a comparison of four different methods for diagnosis of the nutritional status of patients admitted to a university hospital in Austria is presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical data of 640 hospitalised patients were analysed in a prospective-descriptive study design. Four recommended methods, the Innsbruck nutrition score (INS), the Prideaux nutritional risk assessment (PNRA), the well established nutrition risk index (NRI), and the body mass index (BMI) were used to analyse nutritional status. RESULTS: The BMI showed 90.2% of the patients evaluated to have normal nutritional status, whereas the PNRA identified 48.9%, the NRI 40% and the INS 58.6% as well nourished.

Patients were variously diagnosed with moderate malnutrition: 9% (BMI), 42% (PNRA), 54.8% (NRI) and 30% (INS). Severe malnutrition was detected in 0.5% (BMI), 9.1% (PNRA), 5.2% (NRI) and 11.4% (INS) of the patients evaluated. Cancer patients had the worst nutritional status.

CONCLUSION: Malnutrition seems to be a common diagnosis among hospitalised patients in Austria. Screening and assessment of nutritional status should be integrated into clinical routine.

The methods tested scored malnutrition at different frequencies. BMI seemed to underestimate the prevalence of malnutrition.

Prideaux Nutritional Assessment Tool For Elderly

The PNRA provided some information on clinical outcome, whereas the NRI had the best relationship between the degree of malnutrition and length of stay. Calculation of the INS may give correct diagnosis of severe malnutrition. Further prospective clinical studies are needed to validate the scoring systems used in this study and to provide accurate clinical diagnosis of malnutrition.

Prideaux Nutritional Assessment Tool For Older Adults

DOI: 8 Figures and Tables.