• David Franciole Oliveira Silva, Severina Carla Vieira Cunha Lima, Karine Cavalcanti Mauricio Sena-Evangelista, Dirce Maria Marchioni, Ricardo Ney Cobucci, and AndradeFábia Barbosa deFBPostgraduate Program in Collective Health, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte-UFRN, Natal 59056-000, Brazil..
• Postgraduate Program in Collective Health, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte-UFRN, Natal 59056-000, Brazil.
• Nutrients. 2020 Sep 27; 12 (10).

AbstractCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with high risk of malnutrition, primarily in older people; assessing nutritional risk using appropriate screening tools is critical. This systematic review identified applicable tools and assessed their measurement properties. Literature was searched in the MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS databases. Four studies conducted in China met the eligibility criteria. Sample sizes ranged from six to 182, and participants' ages from 65 to 87 years. Seven nutritional screening and assessment tools were used: the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002), the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), the MNA-short form (MNA-sf), the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), the Nutritional Risk Index (NRI), the Geriatric NRI (GNRI), and modified Nutrition Risk in the Critically ill (mNUTRIC) score. Nutritional risk was identified in 27.5% to 100% of participants. The NRS-2002, MNA, MNA-sf, NRI, and MUST demonstrated high sensitivity; the MUST had better specificity. The MNA and MUST demonstrated better criterion validity. The MNA-sf demonstrated better predictive validity for poor appetite and weight loss; the NRS-2002 demonstrated better predictive validity for prolonged hospitalization. mNUTRIC score demonstrated good predictive validity for hospital mortality. Most instruments demonstrate high sensitivity for identifying nutritional risk, but none are acknowledged as the best for nutritional screening in older adults with COVID-19.

34 keywords...

hide…