Nutrition (Burbank, Los Angeles County, Calif.) · 2010
Subjective global assessment is not sufficient to screen patients with defective hepatic metabolism.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Taniguchi Eitaro, Kawaguchi Takumi, Itou Minoru, Oriishi Tetsuharu, Ibi Ryoko, Torii Mari, Yoshida Kiyomi, Adachi Yuko, Otsuka Momoka, Uchida Yuuki, Tanaka Suiko, Takakura Machiko, Sata Michio
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Subjective global assessment (SGA) is useful for screening malnourished patients with several diseases, although it has been indicated to underestimate nutritional status for patients with liver disease. Accordingly, the aim of this study was to examine the usefulness of SGA as a nutritional screening tool for patients with liver disease, compared to patients with gastroenterological disease, without bias of personal ability and experience.
METHODS: SGA was performed on 129 of hospitalized patients (86 with liver disease and 43 with gastroenterological disease). Nutritional status was categorized as well-nourished or malnourished status, based on nutritional indicators from laboratory data.
RESULTS: The SGA screening ratio (sensitivity) for malnourished patients with liver disease was significantly lower than gastroenterological disease, while specificity or efficiency was not significantly different. In nutritional indicators from laboratory data, the difference between SGA-positive and SGA-negative patients with liver disease was significant but not so remarkable compared with the difference between those with other diseases. The positive number of SGA components per patient for the liver disease group was significantly less than gastroenterological disease group.
CONCLUSIONS: SGA for patients with liver diseases was not sufficient as a nutritional screening tool because malnutrition induced by defective hepatic metabolism was not characterized fully.
METHODS: SGA was performed on 129 of hospitalized patients (86 with liver disease and 43 with gastroenterological disease). Nutritional status was categorized as well-nourished or malnourished status, based on nutritional indicators from laboratory data.
RESULTS: The SGA screening ratio (sensitivity) for malnourished patients with liver disease was significantly lower than gastroenterological disease, while specificity or efficiency was not significantly different. In nutritional indicators from laboratory data, the difference between SGA-positive and SGA-negative patients with liver disease was significant but not so remarkable compared with the difference between those with other diseases. The positive number of SGA components per patient for the liver disease group was significantly less than gastroenterological disease group.
CONCLUSIONS: SGA for patients with liver diseases was not sufficient as a nutritional screening tool because malnutrition induced by defective hepatic metabolism was not characterized fully.