| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Vallén, Christina, et al.
(författare)
-
Validity and user-friendliness of the minimal eating observation and nutrition form version II (MEONF II) for undernutrition risk screening
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Food & Nutrition Research. - 1654-6628 .- 1654-661X. ; :55, s. 5801-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective To analyze the criterion-related validity and user-friendliness of the Minimal Eating Observation and Nutrition Form – Version II (MEONF – II) and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) in relation to the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). In addition, the effect of substituting body mass index (BMI) with calf circumference (CC) was explored for the MEONF-II. Methods The study included 100 patients who were assessed for nutritional status with the MNA (full version), considered here to be the gold standard, and screened with the MUST and the MEONF-II. The MEONF-II includes assessments of involuntary weight loss, BMI (or calf circumference), eating difficulties, and presence of clinical signs of undernutrition. Results The MEONF-II sensitivity (0.73) and specificity (0.88) were acceptable. Sensitivity and specificity for the MUST were 0.57 and 0.93, respectively. Replacing the BMI with CC in the MEONF-II gave similar results (sensitivity 0.68, specificity 0.90). Assessors considered MEONF-II instructions and items to be relevant, easy to understand and complete (100%), and the questions to be relevant (98%). MEONF-II and MUST took 8.8 and 4.7 minutes to complete, respectively, and both were considered relevant and easy to finish. In addition, MEONF-II was thought to reveal problems that allows for nursing interventions. Conclusions The MEONF-II is an easy to use, relatively quick, and sensitive screening tool to assess risk of undernutrition among hospital inpatients, which allows for substituting BMI with CC in situations where measures of patient height and weight cannot be easily obtained. High sensitivity is of primary concern in nutritional screening and the MEONF-II outperforms the MUST in this regard.
|
|
| 4. |
- Vallén, Christina, et al.
(författare)
-
Validity and user-friendliness of the minimal eating observation and nutrition form version II (MEONF II) for undernutrition risk screening
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Food & Nutrition Research. - : SNF Swedish Nutrition Foundation. - 1654-6628 .- 1654-661X. ; :55
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective To analyze the criterion-related validity and user-friendliness of the Minimal Eating Observation and Nutrition Form – Version II (MEONF – II) and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) in relation to the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). In addition, the effect of substituting body mass index (BMI) with calf circumference (CC) was explored for the MEONF-II. Methods The study included 100 patients who were assessed for nutritional status with the MNA (full version), considered here to be the gold standard, and screened with the MUST and the MEONF-II. The MEONF-II includes assessments of involuntary weight loss, BMI (or calf circumference), eating difficulties, and presence of clinical signs of undernutrition. Results The MEONF-II sensitivity (0.73) and specificity (0.88) were acceptable. Sensitivity and specificity for the MUST were 0.57 and 0.93, respectively. Replacing the BMI with CC in the MEONF-II gave similar results (sensitivity 0.68, specificity 0.90). Assessors considered MEONF-II instructions and items to be relevant, easy to understand and complete (100%), and the questions to be relevant (98%). MEONF-II and MUST took 8.8 and 4.7 minutes to complete, respectively, and both were considered relevant and easy to finish. In addition, MEONF-II was thought to reveal problems that allows for nursing interventions. Conclusions The MEONF-II is an easy to use, relatively quick, and sensitive screening tool to assess risk of undernutrition among hospital inpatients, which allows for substituting BMI with CC in situations where measures of patient height and weight cannot be easily obtained. High sensitivity is of primary concern in nutritional screening and the MEONF-II outperforms the MUST in this regard.
|
|
| 5. |
- Westergren, Albert, 1967-, et al.
(författare)
-
Cut-off scores for the Minimal Eating Observation and Nutrition Form – Version II (MEONF-II) among hospital inpatients
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Journal of Food and Nutrition Research. - 1336-8672 .- 1338-4260. ; 55, s. 7289-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE:The newly developed Minimal Eating Observation and Nutrition Form - Version II (MEONF-II) has shown promising sensitivity and specificity in relation to the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). However, the suggested MEONF-II cut-off scores for deciding low/moderate and high risk for undernutrition (UN) (>2 and >4, respectively) have not been decided based on statistical criteria but on clinical reasoning. The objective of this study was to identify the optimal cut-off scores for the MEONF-II in relation to the well-established MNA based on statistical criteria.DESIGN:Cross-sectional study.METHODS:The study included 187 patients (mean age, 77.5 years) assessed for nutritional status with the MNA (full version), and screened with the MEONF-II. The MEONF-II includes assessments of involuntary weight loss, Body Mass Index (BMI) (or calf circumference), eating difficulties, and presence of clinical signs ofUN. MEONF-II data were analysed by Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curves and the area under the curve (AUC); optimal cut-offs were identified by the Youden index (J=sensitivity+specificity-1).RESULTS:According to the MEONF-II, 41% were at moderate or high UN risk and according to the MNA, 50% were at risk or already undernourished. The suggested cut-off scores were supported by the Youden indices. The lower cut-off for MEONF-II, used to identify any level of risk for UN (>2; J=0.52) gave an overall accuracy of 76% and the AUC was 80%. The higher cut-off for identifying those with high risk for UN (>4; J=0.33) had an accuracy of 63% and the AUC was 70%.CONCLUSIONS:The suggested MEONF-II cut-off scores were statistically supported. This improves the confidence of its clinical use.
|
|
| 6. |
- Westergren, Albert, et al.
(författare)
-
Cut-off scores for the Minimal Eating Observation and Nutrition Form – Version II (MEONF-II) among hospital inpatients
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Journal of Food and Nutrition Research. - : Food Reseach Institute. - 1336-8672. ; 55
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The newly developed Minimal Eating Observation and Nutrition Form - Version II (MEONF-II) has shown promising sensitivity and specificity in relation to the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). However, the suggested MEONF-II cut-off scores for deciding low/moderate and high risk for undernutrition (UN) (>2 and >4, respectively) have not been decided based on statistical criteria but on clinical reasoning. The objective of this study was to identify the optimal cut-off scores for the MEONF-II in relation to the well-established MNA based on statistical criteria. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: The study included 187 patients (mean age, 77.5 years) assessed for nutritional status with the MNA (full version), and screened with the MEONF-II. The MEONF-II includes assessments of involuntary weight loss, Body Mass Index (BMI) (or calf circumference), eating difficulties, and presence of clinical signs ofUN. MEONF-II data were analysed by Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC)curves and the area under the curve (AUC); optimal cut-offs were identified by the Youden index (J=sensitivity+specificity-1). RESULTS: According to the MEONF-II, 41% were at moderate or high UN risk and according to the MNA, 50% were at risk or already undernourished. The suggested cut-off scores were supported by the Youden indices. The lower cut-off for MEONF-II, used to identify any level of risk for UN (>2; J=0.52) gave an overall accuracy of 76% and the AUC was 80%. The higher cut-off for identifying those with high risk for UN (>4; J=0.33) had an accuracy of 63% and the AUC was 70%. CONCLUSIONS: The suggested MEONF-II cut-off scores were statistically supported. This improves the confidence of its clinical use.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
