Improving Nutritional Screening of Hospitalized Patients

The Role of Prealbumin

Malcolm K. Robinson, Elaine B. Trujillo, Kris M. Mogensen, Jan Rounds, Katherine McManus, Danny Jacobs

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

79 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Limited resources prevent hospitals from having all patients formally evaluated by a nutrition expert. Thus, hospitals rely on nutrition-screening tools to identify malnourished patients. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a nutrition-screening protocol, prealbumin (PAB), retinol binding protein (RBP), and albumin (ALB) in identifying malnourished hospitalized patients. Methods: A nutrition screening protocol was prospectively used in medical and surgical patients and consisted of a nurse administering a questionnaire to patients and requesting formal evaluation by a registered dietitian (RD) only if nutritional issues were identified. Patients also had ALB, PAB, and RBP drawn, which were used to both screen and identify the malnourished. PAB, RBP, and ALB were compared as predictors of RD classification of patient nutritional status. Results: The nutrition-screening protocol classified 104 of 320 patients (33%) as malnourished. However, 43% of the patients were not deemed at nutritional risk according to this protocol and therefore did not receive RD assessment. PAB was a significant predictor of RD-determined nutritional status (p < .05), whereas RBP and ALB were not. PAB screening/assessment identified 50% (162/320) of the patients as being malnourished. Notably, 50% of the patients (71 of 142) who were not evaluated by an RD were identified as malnourished using PAB criteria. The nutrition-screening protocol took 1.2 days longer to determine malnourishment compared with PAB (p = .0021). Conclusions: Use of screening questionnaires may miss or delay identification of malnourished patients. PAB screening/assessment may improve identification of those patients requiring nutrition intervention and thus enhance the care of hospitalized individuals.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)389-395
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition
Volume27
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Prealbumin
Nutritionists
Retinol-Binding Proteins
Albumins
Nutritional Status
Malnutrition

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)
  • Nutrition and Dietetics

Cite this

Improving Nutritional Screening of Hospitalized Patients : The Role of Prealbumin. / Robinson, Malcolm K.; Trujillo, Elaine B.; Mogensen, Kris M.; Rounds, Jan; McManus, Katherine; Jacobs, Danny.

In: Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, Vol. 27, No. 6, 01.01.2003, p. 389-395.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Robinson, Malcolm K. ; Trujillo, Elaine B. ; Mogensen, Kris M. ; Rounds, Jan ; McManus, Katherine ; Jacobs, Danny. / Improving Nutritional Screening of Hospitalized Patients : The Role of Prealbumin. In: Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. 2003 ; Vol. 27, No. 6. pp. 389-395.
@article{f5411f5e77e54a3fbd5c59e5da35eeee,
title = "Improving Nutritional Screening of Hospitalized Patients: The Role of Prealbumin",
abstract = "Background: Limited resources prevent hospitals from having all patients formally evaluated by a nutrition expert. Thus, hospitals rely on nutrition-screening tools to identify malnourished patients. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a nutrition-screening protocol, prealbumin (PAB), retinol binding protein (RBP), and albumin (ALB) in identifying malnourished hospitalized patients. Methods: A nutrition screening protocol was prospectively used in medical and surgical patients and consisted of a nurse administering a questionnaire to patients and requesting formal evaluation by a registered dietitian (RD) only if nutritional issues were identified. Patients also had ALB, PAB, and RBP drawn, which were used to both screen and identify the malnourished. PAB, RBP, and ALB were compared as predictors of RD classification of patient nutritional status. Results: The nutrition-screening protocol classified 104 of 320 patients (33{\%}) as malnourished. However, 43{\%} of the patients were not deemed at nutritional risk according to this protocol and therefore did not receive RD assessment. PAB was a significant predictor of RD-determined nutritional status (p < .05), whereas RBP and ALB were not. PAB screening/assessment identified 50{\%} (162/320) of the patients as being malnourished. Notably, 50{\%} of the patients (71 of 142) who were not evaluated by an RD were identified as malnourished using PAB criteria. The nutrition-screening protocol took 1.2 days longer to determine malnourishment compared with PAB (p = .0021). Conclusions: Use of screening questionnaires may miss or delay identification of malnourished patients. PAB screening/assessment may improve identification of those patients requiring nutrition intervention and thus enhance the care of hospitalized individuals.",
author = "Robinson, {Malcolm K.} and Trujillo, {Elaine B.} and Mogensen, {Kris M.} and Jan Rounds and Katherine McManus and Danny Jacobs",
year = "2003",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0148607103027006389",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "27",
pages = "389--395",
journal = "Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition",
issn = "0148-6071",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Improving Nutritional Screening of Hospitalized Patients

T2 - The Role of Prealbumin

AU - Robinson, Malcolm K.

AU - Trujillo, Elaine B.

AU - Mogensen, Kris M.

AU - Rounds, Jan

AU - McManus, Katherine

AU - Jacobs, Danny

PY - 2003/1/1

Y1 - 2003/1/1

N2 - Background: Limited resources prevent hospitals from having all patients formally evaluated by a nutrition expert. Thus, hospitals rely on nutrition-screening tools to identify malnourished patients. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a nutrition-screening protocol, prealbumin (PAB), retinol binding protein (RBP), and albumin (ALB) in identifying malnourished hospitalized patients. Methods: A nutrition screening protocol was prospectively used in medical and surgical patients and consisted of a nurse administering a questionnaire to patients and requesting formal evaluation by a registered dietitian (RD) only if nutritional issues were identified. Patients also had ALB, PAB, and RBP drawn, which were used to both screen and identify the malnourished. PAB, RBP, and ALB were compared as predictors of RD classification of patient nutritional status. Results: The nutrition-screening protocol classified 104 of 320 patients (33%) as malnourished. However, 43% of the patients were not deemed at nutritional risk according to this protocol and therefore did not receive RD assessment. PAB was a significant predictor of RD-determined nutritional status (p < .05), whereas RBP and ALB were not. PAB screening/assessment identified 50% (162/320) of the patients as being malnourished. Notably, 50% of the patients (71 of 142) who were not evaluated by an RD were identified as malnourished using PAB criteria. The nutrition-screening protocol took 1.2 days longer to determine malnourishment compared with PAB (p = .0021). Conclusions: Use of screening questionnaires may miss or delay identification of malnourished patients. PAB screening/assessment may improve identification of those patients requiring nutrition intervention and thus enhance the care of hospitalized individuals.

AB - Background: Limited resources prevent hospitals from having all patients formally evaluated by a nutrition expert. Thus, hospitals rely on nutrition-screening tools to identify malnourished patients. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a nutrition-screening protocol, prealbumin (PAB), retinol binding protein (RBP), and albumin (ALB) in identifying malnourished hospitalized patients. Methods: A nutrition screening protocol was prospectively used in medical and surgical patients and consisted of a nurse administering a questionnaire to patients and requesting formal evaluation by a registered dietitian (RD) only if nutritional issues were identified. Patients also had ALB, PAB, and RBP drawn, which were used to both screen and identify the malnourished. PAB, RBP, and ALB were compared as predictors of RD classification of patient nutritional status. Results: The nutrition-screening protocol classified 104 of 320 patients (33%) as malnourished. However, 43% of the patients were not deemed at nutritional risk according to this protocol and therefore did not receive RD assessment. PAB was a significant predictor of RD-determined nutritional status (p < .05), whereas RBP and ALB were not. PAB screening/assessment identified 50% (162/320) of the patients as being malnourished. Notably, 50% of the patients (71 of 142) who were not evaluated by an RD were identified as malnourished using PAB criteria. The nutrition-screening protocol took 1.2 days longer to determine malnourishment compared with PAB (p = .0021). Conclusions: Use of screening questionnaires may miss or delay identification of malnourished patients. PAB screening/assessment may improve identification of those patients requiring nutrition intervention and thus enhance the care of hospitalized individuals.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=1642431749&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=1642431749&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0148607103027006389

DO - 10.1177/0148607103027006389

M3 - Article

VL - 27

SP - 389

EP - 395

JO - Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition

JF - Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition

SN - 0148-6071

IS - 6

ER -