PP284 - MUSCLE MASS ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE GLIM CRITERIA: RESULTS FROM A NATIONAL SURVEY OF SWEDISH DIETITIANS

PP284

MUSCLE MASS ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE GLIM CRITERIA: RESULTS FROM A NATIONAL SURVEY OF SWEDISH DIETITIANS

M. Dietrichson^1,*, K. Windahl^2,3, Y. Orrevall^4,5, H. Jager-Wittenaar^6,7,8, S. Einarsson¹

¹Food, Nutrition and Culinary Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, ²Division of Renal Medicine, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology, Karolinska Institutet, ³Division of Clinical Nutrition and Dietetics, Department of Orthopedics, Danderyds hospital, ⁴Clinical Nutrition, Women's Health and Allied Health Professionals Theme, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, ⁵Department of Food studies, nutrition and dietetics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden, ⁶Research Group Healthy Ageing, Allied Health Care and Nursing, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen, ⁷Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology , Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, Netherlands, ⁸Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium

Rationale: The GLIM criteria for diagnosing malnutrition in adults have gained broad acceptance, however, little is known about its application and operationalization. We aimed to investigate how clinical dietitians in Sweden use the GLIM criteria, with focus on the phenotypic criterion ‘low muscle mass’.

Methods: This is a sub-study of the research project ‘Muscle mass assessment program (MMAP) for dietitians’ that received the MNI Grant Award 2024. A digital survey was distributed in 2025. Questions answered on a 5-point Likert-scale were dichotomized. Pearson’s Chi-square test was used to examine demographic differences among dietitians in assessing muscle mass at a p <0.05 significance level.

Results: Selected survey items from 133 dietitians are presented. In total, 119 dietitians (89%) reported that they ‘sometimes to always’ assessed malnutrition in patients when relevant, of whom n = 106 (89%) used the GLIM criteria. The majority of dietitians did not assess muscle mass (n = 109, 82%; missing n = 1). Muscle mass assessment was significantly more common among dietitians with a higher level of education (p = 0.024) and those working in hospital settings (p = 0.040). No statistically significant difference was observed by years of professional experience (<10 vs ≥10 years; p = 0.080). Calf circumference was the most frequently reported method for assessing muscle mass (n = 21, 16%).

Conclusion: Many dietitians in Sweden use the GLIM criteria when diagnosing malnutrition in adults, however, few measure the phenotypic criterion ‘low muscle mass’. This poses a risk of patients with (chronic) malnutrition being overlooked or not adequately assessed. Supporting dietitians when implementing evidence-based recommendations into clinical practice is important. How this can be adequately addressed will be further investigated within the MMAP project.

Disclosure of Interest: None declared