Background: Few studies have compared malnutrition identified by the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics/American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (AND/ASPEN) consensus criteria with clinical outcomes. Our goal was to compare 30-day readmissions (primary outcome), hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS) in survivors, and time to discharge alive (TDA) in all patients assessed as malnourished or not malnourished using these criteria in fiscal year 2015. We hypothesized more frequent admissions, greater mortality, longer LOS, and less likely shorter TDA in the malnourished patients.
Methods: Demographic variables, clinical outcomes, and malnutrition diagnosis for all initial patient admissions were obtained retrospectively from the electronic medical record. Logistic regression was used to compare categorical and Cox proportional hazards for TDA in unadjusted and adjusted (age, sex, race, medical/surgical admission, Charlson Comorbidity Index) models.
Results: Of the 3907 patients referred for nutrition assessment, 66.88% met criteria for moderate or severe malnutrition. Malnourished patients were older (61 vs 58 years, P < .0001), and survivors had longer LOS (15 vs 12 days, P = .0067) and were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days (40% vs 23%, P < .0001). In adjusted models, 30-day readmissions (odds ratio [OR] 2.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.82-2.48) and hospital mortality (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.0-1.99) were increased, and the likelihood of earlier TDA was reduced (hazard ratio [HR] 0.55, 95% CI 0.44-0.77) in those who had >2-day stay.
Conclusion: The AND/ASPEN criteria identified malnourished patients in a high-risk population who had more adverse clinical outcomes. Further studies are needed to determine whether optimal provision of nutrition support can improve these outcomes.
Keywords: adult; life cycle; malnutrition; nutrition; nutrition assessment; nutrition support practice; outcomes research/quality.
© 2018 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.