1. |
- Kaegi-Braun, Nina, et al.
(author)
-
Validation of modified GLIM criteria to predict adverse clinical outcome and response to nutritional treatment : A secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial
- 2022
-
In: Clinical Nutrition. - : Elsevier. - 0261-5614 .- 1532-1983. ; 41:4, s. 795-804
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background & aims: The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) recently suggested specific criteria to standardize the diagnosis of malnutrition. There is need for validation of these criteria regarding response to nutrition treatment. Our aim was to validate modified GLIM (mGLIM) criteria among medical inpatients at risk of disease related malnutrition for prediction of outcome and response to nutritional therapy.Methods: This is a secondary analysis of the Effect of Early Nutritional Support on Frailty, Functional Outcomes, and Recovery of Malnourished Medical Inpatients Trial (EFFORT), a multicenter randomized controlled trial conducted between April 2014 and February 2018. Adult medical inpatients at nutritional risk (Nutrition Risk Score 2002 > 3 points) were randomly assigned to receive nutritional therapy according to an algorithm based on individualized nutritional requirements (intervention group) or standard hospital food (control group). We included all participants with available information regarding mGLIM criteria. The primary outcome was adverse clinical outcome, which was a composite of 30-day all-cause mortality, ICU-admission, rehospitalization rate, major complications and decline in functional status.Results: Of 1917 eligible participants at nutritional risk, 1181 (61.6%) met the diagnosis of malnutrition based on mGLIM criteria. The incidence of adverse clinical outcome was significantly higher in mGLIMpositive participants compared with mGLIM-negative participants [330/1181 (27.9%) versus 140/736 (19.0%); multivariable adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.53; 95% CI 1.22-1.93; p < 0.001]. Regarding the effect of nutritional therapy, the reduction in adverse clinical outcomes was higher in mGLIM-positive participants [180/581 (31.0%) vs. 150/600 (25.0%), OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.53-0.9, p = 0.007], compared with mGLIMnegative participants [75/379 (19.8%) versus 65/357 (18.2%), OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.65-1.40, p = 0.797], a finding that was, however, not significant in interaction analysis (p for interaction = 0.217).Conclusion: Data from this secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized trial involving medical inpatients at nutritional risk validate the strong prognostic value of mGLIM criteria regarding adverse clinical outcomes and other long-term outcomes. However, further research is needed to improve the ability of GLIM criteria to predict therapeutic response to nutritional interventions.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02517476.
|
|
2. |
- Snijders, Birgitta M. G., et al.
(author)
-
Drug-related readmissions in older hospitalized adults : External validation and updating of OPERAM DRA prediction tool
- 2023
-
In: Journal of The American Geriatrics Society. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0002-8614 .- 1532-5415. ; 71:12, s. 3848-3856
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Drug-related readmissions (DRAs) are defined as rehospitalizations with an adverse drug event as their main or significant contributory cause. DRAs represent a major adverse health burden for older patients. A prediction model which identified older hospitalized patients at high risk of a DRA <1 year was previously developed using the OPERAM trial cohort, a European cluster randomized controlled trial including older hospitalized patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. This study has performed external validation and updated the prediction model consequently.Methods: The MedBridge trial cohort (a multicenter cluster randomized crossover trial performed in Sweden) was used as a validation cohort. It consisted of 2516 hospitalized patients aged >= 65 years. Model performance was assessed by: (1) discriminative power, assessed by the C-statistic with a 95% confidence interval (CI); (2) calibration, assessed by visual examination of the calibration plot and use of the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test; and (3) overall accuracy, assessed by the scaled Brier score. Several updating methods were carried out to improve model performance.Results: In total, 2516 older patients were included in the validation cohort, of whom 582 (23.1%) experienced a DRA <1 year. In the validation cohort, the original model showed a good overall accuracy (scaled Brier score 0.03), but discrimination was moderate (C-statistic 0.62 [95% CI 0.59-0.64]), and calibration showed underestimation of risks. In the final updated model, the predictor "cirrhosis with portal hypertension" was removed and "polypharmacy" was added. This improved the model's discriminative capability to a C-statistic of 0.64 (95% CI 0.59-0.70) and enhanced calibration plots. Overall accuracy remained good.Conclusions: The updated OPERAM DRA prediction model may be a useful tool in clinical practice to estimate the risk of DRAs in older hospitalized patients subsequent to discharge. Our efforts lay the groundwork for the future development of models with even better performance.
|
|