三种营养评价方法对老年住院患者营养状况的评价

Evaluating nutritional status of hospitalized elderly patients with different methods

目的用三种营养评价方法评价住院老年患者营养不良风险的发生率,探讨最适合住院老年患者的营养评价方法。方法采用微型营养评价精法（MNA-ALL）、简易的微型营养评价法（MNA-SF）、欧洲营养不良风险调查方法（NRS-2002）对108例住院老年患者营养状况进行调查,并比较不同评价方法的优劣。结果 MNA-ALL和M NA-SF对营养良好、潜在营养不良、营养不良的检出率差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。M NA-ALL、M NA-SF、NRS2002对营养良好和潜在营养不良（包括营养不良）的检出率差异有统计学意义（P〈0.01）。三种方法对男性、低龄组（60~79岁）住院老年患者潜在营养不良（包括营养不良）的检出率差异无统计学意义,女性、高龄组（〉80岁）差异有统计学意义（P〈0.01,P〈0.05）。结论住院老年患者的营养不良风险的发生率较高,MNA-ALL较其他方法检出营养不良的发生率更高,可作为老年患者入院营养状况筛查的方法。

Objective To compare different methods to assess nutritional status of hospitalized elderly patients. Methods The nutrition status of 108 hospitalized elderly patients in our hospital were investigated with the precision mini nutritional assessment（ M NA-ALL）,simple mini nutritional assessment（ M NA-SF）,European malnutrition risk investigation method（ NRS-2002）,respectively and the results were compared. Results There was no statistically significant difference（ P〈0. 05） in the status of well nutrition,potential risk of malnutrition and malnutrition evaluated by M NA-all and M NA-SF. Using M NA-ALL,M NA-SF and NRS2002 to screen the well-nourished and the risk of malnutrition（ including malnutrition）,the difference was statistically significant（ P〈0. 0 1）. While using the M NA-ALL,M NA-SF and NRS2002 to evaluate the risk of malnutrition in younger age group and in the male group,there was no statistical significance（ P〈0. 05）,but there was significant difference（ P〈0. 0 1） in older age and women groups. There were no statistical significance（ P〈0. 05） in comparison in younger group（ 60-79 y） and were statistically significance（ P〈0. 05） in older groups（ 80 y）. Conclusion The prevalence of malnutrition risk for hospitalized elderly patients is high and M NA-ALL is more sensitive to screen the incidence of malnutrition risk than other methods,and it can be used for nutrition screening for elderly patients admitted to hospital.