Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is commonly found in artificial kidney hemodialysis patients, but which is the best method for assessing nutritional status remains unclear.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the three methods including subjective global assessment (SGA), modified quantitative subjective global assessment (MQSGA) and malnutrition-inflammation score (MIS) used for the evaluation of nutritional status in artificial kidney hemodialysis patients.
METHODS: The nutritional status of 62 artificial kidney hemodialysis patients was evaluated by SGA, MQSGA and MIS separately. The anthropometric indices and serum biochemical parameters were measured. According to the levels of high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), all patients were divided into elevated CRP group and normal CRP group. The objective nutritional parameters and the malnutrition scores were compared between these two groups. Pearson’s correlation analysis was utilized to assess the relationship of hs-CRP and SGA, MQSGA, MIS and some other objective nutritional parameters. At the same time, the partial correlation analysis was utilized to assess the relationship of SGA, MQSGA and MIS and some other objective nutritional parameters.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The degree of nutritional status in the elevated CRP group was much worse than that in the normal CRP group, but the mean values in the two methods show that all patients had different degrees of nutritional status. But the difference of MIS in the two groups was magnificent, indicating that MIS is better in evaluating the nutritional status of typeⅡ malnutrition. MIS is more relative to the objective or subjective nutritional indices than SGA and MQSGA by Pearson correlation analysis or partial correlation analysis in terms of excepting age, body height and weight. As a quantitative evaluation method of malnutrition, MIS is more accurate in evaluating the inflammatory level and nutritional status in artificial kidney hemodialysis patients compared with SGA and MQSGA.