PP239 - DISCREPANCY BETWEEN GLOBAL AND ITEM-LEVEL DISCRIMINATORY CAPACITY OF THE MINI NUTRITIONAL ASSESSMENT IN OUTPATIENT OLDER ADULTS
PP239
DISCREPANCY BETWEEN GLOBAL AND ITEM-LEVEL DISCRIMINATORY CAPACITY OF THE MINI NUTRITIONAL ASSESSMENT IN OUTPATIENT OLDER ADULTS
K. Alvarez-Altamirano1, D. K. Gallegos-Rodríguez2, J. D. J. Rivera-Sánchez3, V. Fuchs-Tarlovsky4,*, M. D. Arias-Soberon1, M. P. Bejarano-Rosales1
1Clinical Nutrition, Hospital General de México Dr Eduardo Liceaga, Mexico City, 2Nutrition carrer, Universidad Autonoma de la Ciudad de México, Mexico, 3Geriatric Ward, 4Nutrition and metabolism research unit, Hospital General de México Dr Eduardo Liceaga, Mexico City, Mexico
Rationale: The Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) is a widely used tool to identify nutritional risk in older adults. The contribution of individual components to risk discrimination remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the consistency between global MNA classification and the discriminatory capacity of its individual items in an outpatient population.
Methods: A cross-sectional study with retrospective data collection was conducted in 96 outpatient older adults (≥60 years). Nutritional status was classified using the full MNA. Differences in MNA classification and individual MNA items were analyzed between groups using appropriate statistical tests, including the chi-square test and odds ratio (OR).
Results: The total MNA score showed differences beween groups of nutritional risk and normal nutrition status (25.4 vs 20, p<0.001). The individual MNA components analysis showed that loss of appetite, weight loss, psychological stress, water intake, medications per day, ulcers or injuries, and calf circumference were statistically different between groups p<0.05). Table 1 showed the differences in the proportions, significance, and OR.
Conclusion: Although the MNA total score effectively identifies nutritional risk, only selected components support this discrimination. These findings suggest that not all MNA items contribute equally to nutritional risk classification and highlight the importance of interpreting the tool as a total score rather than individual components.
References: Montejano Lozoya AR, Ferrer Diego RM, Clemente Marín G, Martínez-Alzamora N, Sanjuan Quiles A, Ferrer Ferrándiz E. [Nutrition-related risk factors in autonomous non-institutionalized adult elderly people]. Nutr Hosp 2014;30:858–69. https://doi.org/10.3305/nh.2014.30.4.7829.
Disclosure of Interest: None declared