Comparison between GLIM and PG-SGA methods in the nutritional assessment of hospitalized oncological patients

• Autor(a) principal: SOLON, Lilian Andrade
• Data de Publicação: 2023
• Outros Autores: GOMES, Katia Priscila, LUZ, Marcella Campos Lima Da, TOMIYA, Marília Tokiko Oliveira, CAMPOS, Samara Bomfim Gomes, ARRUDA, Ilma Kruze Grande de
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng; por
• Título da fonte: Revista de Nutrição
• Texto Completo: https://periodicos.puc-campinas.edu.br/nutricao/article/view/10196
• topic: Inflammation; Malnutrition; Nutritionalstatus; Weightloss; Inflamação; Desnutrição; Estado nutricional; Perda de peso

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition and Subjective Global Assessment methods produced by the patient in the nutritional assessment of cancer in-patients.MethodsCross-sectional study with a prospective variable, conducted with patients admitted to a public hospital in Pernambuco, Brazil. The application of these tools and the diagnosis of malnutrition were performed within the first 48 hours of admission. Sociodemographic, clinical and laboratory data were obtained from the medical records and weight, height, arm circumference, triceps skinfold and handgrip strength data were collected.ResultsThe 82 patients evaluated included mostly men aged ≥ 60 years with less than 8 years education. Malnutrition frequency was 93.7% according to the Subjective Global Assessment and including 23.2% severe malnutrition while, according to the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition, 50% of the patients were considered severely malnourished. Malnutrition by the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition showed a sensitivity of 82.9% and when associated with handgrip strength sensitivity was 90.8%, considering the Subjective global assessment produced by the patient as a reference; on the other hand, the specificity was 16.7% independently of adding handgrip strength. None of the anthropometric variables was associated with the reference tool.ConclusionThe Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition proved to be a very sensitive tool for diagnosing malnutrition when compared to the gold standard, particularly for severe malnutrition, but with little specificity. The need for a comprehensive nutritional assessment in the clinical practice was confirmed, using the parameters available and not interpreting them separately.