CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 34Clinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyNutrition and Health in AgingDietetics, Nutrition, and Education

Poor performance in nutrition risk screening may have serious consequences for hospitalized patients

Beck, Anne Marie, Knudsen, Anne Wilkens, Østergaard, Tanja Bak, Rasmussen, Henrik Højgaard, Munk, Tina·2021·Clinical Nutrition ESPEN
DOI 10.1016/j.clnesp.2020.10.019
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background and aim Finding patients at nutrition risk and securing sufficient nutritional intake, is vital to decrease risk of adverse outcomes and all-cause mortality. The aims of this study were therefore to investigate the prevalence of patients being screened for nutrition risk, to determine nutritional coverage in at-risk patients and assess the prevalence of readmissions and mortality within 30 days. Methods A one-day cross-sectional study was performed at Herlev Hospital, Denmark in June 2019. Patients >18 y and hospitalized for ≥4 days were enrolled. Exclusion criteria were admission to the intensive, palliative, acute medical or maternal ward. If a patient was not screened by the ward a clinical dietitian screened the patient. Patients found to be at nutrition-risk underwent a 24-h dietary recall to assess energy and protein intake. Data on length of stay, readmissions, and mortality within 30 days were collected from the hospital patient register. Results In total 197 (F:52%) patients were included. Median (IQR) age 74y (65-81). At the audit day n = 76 (39%) had a primary screening, and n = 42 (21%) were screened within 24 h. A NRS-2002-score ≥ 3 was found in 111 patients (63%). At-risk patients were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days (45% vs. 27%, p = 0.024) and had a higher mortality within 30 days after discharge (23% vs. 10%., p = 0.0285). In patients at nutrition risk 23% covered ≥75% of their energy- and protein requirement the last 24 h. More patient…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.clnesp.2020.10.019

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the one-day cross-sectional study of Beck et al., patients at nutritional risk had a higher mortality within 30 days after discharge (23% vs 10%, p=0.0285).

    “Further, in the one-day cross-sectional study of Beck et al. patients at nutritional risk were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days (45% vs. 27%, p ¼ 0.024) and had a higher mortality within 30 days after discharge (23% vs. 10%., p ¼ 0.0285) [19].”

    From ESPEN guideline on nutritional support for polymorbid medical inpatients (2023) · cites this paper as [19]

  • In the one-day cross-sectional study of Beck et al., patients at nutritional risk were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days (45% vs 27%, p=0.024).

    “Further, in the one-day cross-sectional study of Beck et al. patients at nutritional risk were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days (45% vs. 27%, p ¼ 0.024) and had a higher mortality within 30 days after discharge (23% vs. 10%., p ¼ 0.0285) [19].”

    From ESPEN guideline on nutritional support for polymorbid medical inpatients (2023) · cites this paper as [19]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Beck, A. M., Knudsen, A. W., Østergaard, T. B., Rasmussen, H. H., & Munk, T.
Affiliations
  • Herlev Hospital (DK)
  • Aalborg University Hospital (DK)
Corresponding author
Beck, Anne Marie
ORCID
Venue
Clinical Nutrition ESPEN
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-02
Volume
41
Pages
365-370
ISSN
2405-4577 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.clnesp.2020.10.019
OpenAlex
W3102709803
Cited by
32
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5
FWCI
1.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Clinical Nutrition ESPEN (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VBN Forskningsportal (Aalborg Universitet) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Københavns Professionshøjskole
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Clinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Dietetics, Nutrition, and Education
Keywords
nutritional screening, hospitalized patients, NRS-2002, nutritional status, 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, energy and protein intake, enteral nutrition, parenteral nutrition, clinical dietitians, nutritional care process, length of hospital stay, dietary recall, quality of care audit, older adults
MeSH terms
Aged, Cross-Sectional Studies, Diet, Humans, Nutritional Status, Parenteral Nutrition, Nutritional Support

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review