ApplicationsPosted by Jens Kondrup Mon, September 27, 2010 22:13:16
Korfali et al. Nutritional risk of hospitalized patients in Turkey. Clin Nutr 2009;28:533-7.
Thirty-four hospitals from 19 cities contributed data from 29,139 patients. Only 52% of patients with nutritional risk received nutritional support.
ApplicationsPosted by Jens Kondrup Mon, September 27, 2010 22:09:22
Schiesser et al. Assessment of a novel screening score for nutritional risk in predicting complications in gastro-intestinal surgery. Clin Nutr 2008;27:565-70.
Nutritional risk screening using the NRS 2002 strongly predicts the incidence and severity of complications after surgery.
ApplicationsPosted by Jens Kondrup Mon, September 27, 2010 22:07:12
Sorensen al. EuroOOPS: an international, multicentre study to implement nutritional risk screening and evaluate clinical outcome. Clin Nutr 2008;27:340-9.
Of the 5,051 study patients, 32.6% were defined as 'at-risk' by NRS-2002. 'At-risk' patients had more complications, higher mortality and longer lengths of stay than 'not at-risk' patients and these variables were significantly related to components of NRS-2002, also when adjusted for confounders.
ApplicationsPosted by Jens Kondrup Mon, September 27, 2010 20:54:02
Matos et al. Handgrip strength as a hospital admission nutritional risk screening method. Eur J Clin Nutr 2007;61:1128-35.
Patients identified as undernourished by NRS-2002 (37.9%) were older, shorter and lighter, with a lower functional capacity, a longer length of stay and a lower HGS (P<0.001). When comparing patients with lower HGS (first quartile) with those with the highest HGS (fourth quartile), this parameter revealed good sensitivity (86.7%) and specificity (70.2%) and a k=0.56.
UpdatePosted by Jens Kondrup Fri, September 24, 2010 23:30:19
The ESPEN guideline on screening was published in 2003 and recommended NRS 2002 as the screening instrument for hospitalized patients. It was stressed that the guideline deliberately made reference to the year 2002 to indicate that the version was based on the evidence available until 2002 and that it needed to be updated and adapted to current state of knowledge in the future.
The guideline has been cited 205 times according to Pubmed and 34 papers citing NRS 2002 in the title/abstract have been published (Pubmed collection).
In this category of the blog, users can make suggestions for a coming update.
One area obviously is to evaluate the scientific evidence for the use of NRS 2002 in patients who are not hospitalized, e.g. in the outpatient clinic.
Another area is to reevaulate the age cut-off point of 70 years - is this still the optimum interpretation of the evidence?
We are looking forward to suggestions.
Back to NRS 2002 webpage