Validity of Nutritional Screening Tools for Hospitalized Children
Background. Malnutrition in hospitalized children can be prevented if children with risk of malnutrition are identified. Every hospital is recommended to have a standard nutritional screening tool. Numerous simple screening tools have been developed, namely Paediatric Yorkhill Malnutrition Score (PY...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2014-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Nutrition and Metabolism |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/143649 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849398295165665280 |
|---|---|
| author | Nathania Wonoputri Julistio T. B. Djais Ina Rosalina |
| author_facet | Nathania Wonoputri Julistio T. B. Djais Ina Rosalina |
| author_sort | Nathania Wonoputri |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background. Malnutrition in hospitalized children can be prevented if children with risk of malnutrition are identified. Every hospital is recommended to have a standard nutritional screening tool. Numerous simple screening tools have been developed, namely Paediatric Yorkhill Malnutrition Score (PYMS), Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition in Paediatrics (STAMP), and Screening Tool for Risk on Nutritional Status and Growth (STRONG-kids). None has been accepted as a universal tool. Our study aims to determine the best screening tools compared to Subjective Global Nutrition Assessment (SGNA), an assessment tool which is more complex as our gold standard. Methods. This diagnostic study involved 116 patients aged 1–15 years. Three screening tools and SGNA were examined to each subject. Statistical analysis was used to determine sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratio (LR) by results from screening tools divided into low and moderate-high risk of malnutrition compared to results from SGNA divided into no and moderate-severe malnutrition. Results. PYMS showed superior agreement to SGNA resulting in sensitivity 95.32%, specificity 76.92%, positive LR 4.13, and negative LR 0.061. STAMP resulted in sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, and negative LR, respectively, as 100%, 11.54%, 1.13, and 0 and STRONG-kids resulted in 100%, 7.7%, 1.083, and 0. Conclusion. PYMS was the most reliable screening tool. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-a6d206dcd2e14dde9a3c5c6ce6d5d884 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2090-0724 2090-0732 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2014-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Nutrition and Metabolism |
| spelling | doaj-art-a6d206dcd2e14dde9a3c5c6ce6d5d8842025-08-20T03:38:39ZengWileyJournal of Nutrition and Metabolism2090-07242090-07322014-01-01201410.1155/2014/143649143649Validity of Nutritional Screening Tools for Hospitalized ChildrenNathania Wonoputri0Julistio T. B. Djais1Ina Rosalina2Department of Child Health, Universitas Padjadjaran, Dr. Hasan Sadikin General Hospital, Jalan Pasteur No. 38, Bandung 40161, IndonesiaDepartment of Child Health, Universitas Padjadjaran, Dr. Hasan Sadikin General Hospital, Jalan Pasteur No. 38, Bandung 40161, IndonesiaDepartment of Child Health, Universitas Padjadjaran, Dr. Hasan Sadikin General Hospital, Jalan Pasteur No. 38, Bandung 40161, IndonesiaBackground. Malnutrition in hospitalized children can be prevented if children with risk of malnutrition are identified. Every hospital is recommended to have a standard nutritional screening tool. Numerous simple screening tools have been developed, namely Paediatric Yorkhill Malnutrition Score (PYMS), Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition in Paediatrics (STAMP), and Screening Tool for Risk on Nutritional Status and Growth (STRONG-kids). None has been accepted as a universal tool. Our study aims to determine the best screening tools compared to Subjective Global Nutrition Assessment (SGNA), an assessment tool which is more complex as our gold standard. Methods. This diagnostic study involved 116 patients aged 1–15 years. Three screening tools and SGNA were examined to each subject. Statistical analysis was used to determine sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratio (LR) by results from screening tools divided into low and moderate-high risk of malnutrition compared to results from SGNA divided into no and moderate-severe malnutrition. Results. PYMS showed superior agreement to SGNA resulting in sensitivity 95.32%, specificity 76.92%, positive LR 4.13, and negative LR 0.061. STAMP resulted in sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, and negative LR, respectively, as 100%, 11.54%, 1.13, and 0 and STRONG-kids resulted in 100%, 7.7%, 1.083, and 0. Conclusion. PYMS was the most reliable screening tool.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/143649 |
| spellingShingle | Nathania Wonoputri Julistio T. B. Djais Ina Rosalina Validity of Nutritional Screening Tools for Hospitalized Children Journal of Nutrition and Metabolism |
| title | Validity of Nutritional Screening Tools for Hospitalized Children |
| title_full | Validity of Nutritional Screening Tools for Hospitalized Children |
| title_fullStr | Validity of Nutritional Screening Tools for Hospitalized Children |
| title_full_unstemmed | Validity of Nutritional Screening Tools for Hospitalized Children |
| title_short | Validity of Nutritional Screening Tools for Hospitalized Children |
| title_sort | validity of nutritional screening tools for hospitalized children |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/143649 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT nathaniawonoputri validityofnutritionalscreeningtoolsforhospitalizedchildren AT julistiotbdjais validityofnutritionalscreeningtoolsforhospitalizedchildren AT inarosalina validityofnutritionalscreeningtoolsforhospitalizedchildren |